Issue 161:  Out of bound value behaviour for _maximum and _length in sequences                                                                                                                                     (c_mapping-rtf)
Source:  (, )
Nature:  Uncategorized
Severity:  Medium
Summary: Summary: Section 14.11. Para 6 indicates error to set _length or _maximum member larger than specified bound. Say "If the _length and _maximum members are set to a value larger than specified...."

Resolution: replace sentence
Revised Text:  Proposed fix: Add the sentence to the paragraph
Actions taken:
October 10, 1996: received issue
October 5, 2000: closed issue
Discussion: 
This is now section 1.11 in the June 1999 edition and the sentence still 

exists.  In full the sentence in question reads  "For bounded sequences, it 

is an error to set the _length or _maximum member to a value larger than 

the specified bound."  The issue seems to be suggesting that the spec 

would be clearer or more complete if we stated a problem and then went 

on to state the consequence of the error. However, the consequences of 

the error can be well defined.



Replace 

sentence with:

If the _length or _maximum members are set to values that are larger 

than the size of a bounded sequence or larger than the allocated space 

for a unbounded buffer then the result is undefined behavior.
End of Annotations:=====

Issue 161: Out of bound value behaviour for _maximum and _length in
sequences
Summary: Section 14.11. Para 6 indicates error to set _length or
_maximum
member larger than specified bound.  Say "If the _length and _maximum
members are set to a value larger than specified...."

Discussion - This is now section 1.11 in the June 1999 edition and the
sentence still exists.  In full the sentence in question reads  "For
bounded
sequences, it is an error to set the _length or _maximum member to a
value
larger than the specified bound."  The issue seems to be suggesting
that the
spec would be clearer or more complete if we stated a problem and then
went
on to state the consequence of the error. It would be nice to say "if
you
set length or maximum bigger than the buffer or bound size a hand will
come
out of the sky and stop the bad coding."  But I don't think the
consequences
of the error will can be well defined.  Further I think it would be
out of
scope for the RFP to specify that the ORB should test for these
conditions.
The C++ Language mapping has edited the sentence to read "For a
bounded
sequence, attempting to set the current length to a value larger than
the
maximum length given in the OMG IDL specification produces undefined
behavior."  But the C problem is actually more general that is the C++
problem.  In C one could set the length or maximum larger than the
allocated
size of an unbounded sequence where in C++ the 'class' can prevent
that.  I
propose we change the sentence to:
"If the _length or _maximum members are set to values that are larger
than
the size of a bounded sequence or larger than the allocated space for
a
unbounded buffer then the result is undefined behavior."