[TJE]
This little mismatch has bitten me in code, so I thought I'd shed a little more light on the matter for those who may not have picked up on it from the documentation...

The ranges placed in a switch statement's "-indexvar" target are inclusive of the character AFTER the match.  This differs from the behavior of [regexp]'s "-indices" option, which is exclusive of the same character.

Here's a simple example:

  % set line {foo bar}
  foo bar
  % regexp -inline -indices {foo} $line
  {0 2}
  % switch -regexp -indexvar index -- $line {foo} {set index}
  {0 3}

As you can see, regexp reports the actual match (character '0' through '2' matches "foo"), whereas switch reports the match PLUS the character after (character '0' through '3' matches "foo ").

Don't get bitten!

----
Curiously, [TIP]#75 [http://tip.tcl.tk/75] (which seems to be the only one that specifies this feature) states (emphasis added):
    :   the new option `-indexvar` will also be provided which will name a variable into which a list of match indices (each a two item list of values ''in the same way that [[regexp -indices]]'' computes) will be placed
This rather suggests that the stated mismatch is a bug...

'''[DGP]''' Please have a look at the documentation for [regexp] and [switch].
[http://www.tcl.tk/man/tcl8.5/TclCmd/regexp.htm] [http://www.tcl.tk/man/tcl8.5/TclCmd/switch.htm].
Appears to me the [switch] '''-indexvar''' option is operating exactly as
it is documented to do.  ''As a meta-comment, I think the Tracker is a much better
place to resolve question like this than the wiki.''

Is it significant that tcl/tests/switch.test does, in fact, have tests
for use of -indexvar (in conjuntion with -matchvar) and the tests appear
to be passing? Either the tests aren't testing indexvar the way one would
think, the test writer ''cooked'' the tests so they would pass even
though not producing the real expected results, or the code is doing the
right thing, but has, perhaps, the wrong docs. See tcl/generic/tclCmdM.c,
function Tcl_SwitchObjCmd for the code which provides the [switch] functionality.

'''[male]''' - 2008-02-15 - for me it is not really interesting, what the man page is telling, if it references the behaviour of regexp, which is different! And even documented behaviour could be buggy! In my eyes both regexp based features should behave the same, no matter what the man page is telling!
======
set string "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dogs."

set matches {}
set indexes {}

switch -regexp -matchvar matches -indexvar indexes -- $string {
  ^(.*)u([a-z]+)(.*)(o[a-z]+)(.*)\.  {
        puts "Found"
        puts " matches = .${matches}."
        puts " indexes = .${indexes}."
   }
  default {
        puts "string = $string"
  }
}

Found
 matches = .{The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dogs.} {The quick brown fox j} mped { over the lazy d} ogs {}.
 indexes = .{0 46} {0 21} {22 26} {26 42} {42 45} {45 45}.
======

[DKF]: Match ranges are the same. Ending index not (one-off). File a bug.
<<br>>
Correction, not a bug. It's documented to be what it is. (Not saying whether it is "morally" right. Just not a bug ''per se''.)

[Lars H]: What seems to be the trouble here is that the TIP and its reference implementation contradict each other. As shown above, the text of the TIP states that [[switch -indexvar]] computes indices in the same way as [[regexp -indices]]. However, the reference implementation computes them as
======
                    rangeObjAry[0] = Tcl_NewLongObj(info.matches[j].start);
                    rangeObjAry[1] = Tcl_NewLongObj(info.matches[j].end);
======
whereas [regexp] computes them as
======
                    start = offset + info.matches[i].start;
                    end = offset + info.matches[i].end;

                    /*
                     * Adjust index so it refers to the last character in the
                     * match instead of the first character after the match.
                     */

                    if (end >= offset) {
                        end--;
                    }
======
There are no test cases or documentation in the reference implementation, only a patch of generic/tclCmdMZ.c.

So what was it that the TCT approved? The specification found in the TIP or the reference implementation provided?

[DKF]: If I was doing it again, I'd make it match what '''[regexp] -indices''' reports, but formally it is a misfeature and not a bug because it is documented and tested to do exactly what it does. It's just that what it should probably have done is something else. Alas.
----
[TJE] Note that I credit the documents (if indirectly) with correctness in this matter.  I don't LIKE the behavior, but it is, indeed, documented.  My code is fixed with a weird-looking little '-1' appendage.  Here $arg is the switched-upon value and $ipair is the extracted index pair I care about:

  set substring [string range $arg {*}$ipair-1]

Whee!
----
!!!!!!
[Tcl syntax]|[Arts and crafts of Tcl-Tk programming]
%| [Category String Processing] | [Category Example] |%
!!!!!!