Re: MAX_ARRLEN

[Peter Stephenson <Peter.Stephenson@xxxxxxx>]

On Mon, 23 Apr 2012 18:36:22 +0200
Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The problem with the current approach is that it only limits accessing
> an array beyond a certain index, even if it's already larger, and you
> can create arrays of any size by other means. To me it seems like the
> limit is applied in the wrong place at least. If there are places that
> unexpectedly create large arrays, we should add the safeguards in
> those places, if possible.

That's a good point --- and, in fact, creating *whole* arrays isn't a
problem, either, unless we think we're protecting against

  stuff=($(<bigfile))

and I don't think we are; why is that more problematic than the
unprotected

  stuff="$(<bigfile)"

?

However, this has now turned from a simple change to a research project.

-- 
Peter Stephenson <pws@xxxxxxx>            Software Engineer
Tel: +44 (0)1223 692070                   Cambridge Silicon Radio Limited
Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, UK




Member of the CSR plc group of companies. CSR plc registered in England and Wales, registered number 4187346, registered office Churchill House, Cambridge Business Park, Cowley Road, Cambridge, CB4 0WZ, United Kingdom
More information can be found at www.csr.com. Follow CSR on Twitter at http://twitter.com/CSR_PLC and read our blog at www.csr.com/blog