Given a simple test file bfp as:
import bincopy
bfp = bincopy.BinFile(word_size_bits=8)
bfp.add_binary(b"cafe", 0)
bfp.add_binary(b"babe", 5)
our segments look like
Segment(address=0, data=bytearray(b'cafe'))
Segment(address=5, data=bytearray(b'babe'))
bytearray(b'cafe\xffbabe')
Filling the single byte gap works as expected:
Segment(address=0, data=bytearray(b'cafe babe'))
bytearray(b'cafe babe')
but trying to fill with a value larger than a gap will corrupt the file by filling the non-empty region too.
For example:
will push the second segment and truncate it silently:
Segment(address=0, data=bytearray(b'cafe -babe'))
bytearray(b'cafe -bab')
Version
Expected behaviour
I'm not entirely sure, for my specific usecase (filling empty regions in a microchip pic30-series hex file with the b"\xff\xff\xff\x00" pattern that represents it written to flash so a checksum on the python side can be calculated even across gaps) i would want fill to behave as if there was a magic first layer across the entire region that would start at 0 and repeat the pattern over and over - and then the gaps (the ones smaller than max_words) would just be filled with the part of the pattern that appears at this location. So in the above example i would expect the gap to be just b" " because that would be what would be at the gap's location if the fill pattern was actually a repeating segment underneath.
I can also understand if this would be considered out of scope/too messy to do/different expectations for different people and in that case i believe an assertion should be thrown instead of silent data corruption.
Given a simple test file
bfpas:our segments look like
Filling the single byte gap works as expected:
but trying to fill with a value larger than a gap will corrupt the file by filling the non-empty region too.
For example:
will push the second segment and truncate it silently:
Version
Expected behaviour
I'm not entirely sure, for my specific usecase (filling empty regions in a microchip pic30-series hex file with the
b"\xff\xff\xff\x00"pattern that represents it written to flash so a checksum on the python side can be calculated even across gaps) i would want fill to behave as if there was a magic first layer across the entire region that would start at 0 and repeat the pattern over and over - and then the gaps (the ones smaller than max_words) would just be filled with the part of the pattern that appears at this location. So in the above example i would expect the gap to be justb" "because that would be what would be at the gap's location if the fill pattern was actually a repeating segment underneath.I can also understand if this would be considered out of scope/too messy to do/different expectations for different people and in that case i believe an assertion should be thrown instead of silent data corruption.