On Apr 19, 2013, at 12:10 PM, David Mandelberg <[email protected]> wrote:

> Is http://tracker.bro.org/bro/ticket/981 a bug, or did I misunderstand
> how the language is supposed to work?

Provided that &default for tables is not supposed to modify table membership 
when accessing indices that don't exist, the example you gave looked correct to 
me (i.e. not a bug)

Since foo[0] and foo[1] are never actually entries in the table, you're always 
working directly with the value associated with the &default attribute whenever 
you access the table at those indices.

- Jon
_______________________________________________
bro-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman.icsi.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/bro-dev

Reply via email to