IndexOutOfBoundsException in NamedProperties.getPropertyName

[remkop]

IndexOutOfBoundsException in method io.github.jmcleodfoss.msg.NamedProperties::getPropertyName

Validation at the beginning of the method checks entries.length but does not check guids.length:

// NamedProperties.guids is initialized to an array with 6 elements;
// propertyIndex has value 6...   resulting in IndexOutOfBoundsException 

// FYI: Property::factory read propertyTag=0xFFFF_FFFF_8006_001F, propertyId=0x8006, propertyIndex=6

String getPropertyName(int propertyIndex) 
{
    if (propertyIndex >= entries.length)
        return String.format("Out of bounds error (%d >= %d", propertyIndex, entries.length);

    if (entries[propertyIndex].propertyType == EntryStreamEntry.PropertyType.STRING_NAMED_PROPERTY)
        return stringsByOffset.get(entries[propertyIndex].nameIdentifierOrStringOffset);

    if (PropertyLIDs.lids.keySet().contains(entries[propertyIndex].nameIdentifierOrStringOffset)) {
        GUID guid = PropertyLIDs.guids.get(entries[propertyIndex].nameIdentifierOrStringOffset);

        // FYI: `entries[propertyIndex]` has value "0x00008581 property index 0x0006 GUID index 0x0004 Numerical named property"
        // FYI: `entries[propertyIndex].nameIdentifierOrStringOffset` has value 0x00008581
        // FYI: `guid` has value "00062008-0000-0000-c000-000000000046" (which matches NamedProperties.guids[1] )

        if (guid != null && guid.equals(guids[propertyIndex])) { // <------ java.lang.IndexOutOfBoundsException : Invalid array range: 6 to 6
            return PropertyLIDs.lids.get(entries[propertyIndex].nameIdentifierOrStringOffset);
        }
    }
...

[Jmcleodfoss]

Good catch. I think this code needs some refactoring since it works because of the coincidence that a propertyIndex into guids is smaller than the number of elements in the entries array.

[Jmcleodfoss]

On review, it looks like saying this "works by coincidence" is incorrect; the number of GUIDs must always be less than or equal to the number of entries based on how the GIUDs are used. So I think we can call this closed. @remkop, I'll leave this open for a few weeks to give you time to review/comment before closing.