Re: Unchecked Buffer
From: Alun Jones (alun@texis.com)
Date: 01/29/03
- Next message: Ed Thurber: "Re: Distributing critical updates"
- Previous message: Doug Fox: "Re: MBSA v1.1"
- In reply to: Ken Wickes [MS]: "Re: Unchecked Buffer"
- Next in thread: Hector Santos: "Re: Unchecked Buffer"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
From: alun@texis.com (Alun Jones) Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2003 21:57:40 GMT
In article <O9L8cP9xCHA.2536@TK2MSFTNGP09>, "Ken Wickes [MS]"
<kenwic@online.microsoft.com> wrote:
>
>
Ken, old chap, please do us a favour, and don't leave the "--" line in the top
of your postings - it's _supposed_ to be used as a signature-separator, and as
a result, when I'm trying to reply to your postings, the newsreader I'm using
tries to automatically strip your signature, and I get the above as the
_whole_ of your quoted post. I understand you're fighting against Outlook,
and trying to avoid top-posting, which is a great goal. I'm told that there
are other tools you can get that can help with doing proper signature
placement.
Now, on to what I wanted to say on your post, brought over by manual cut and
paste:
>> 1) The compiler should be able to do a syntax check on this and issue a
>> warning. The GetWindowText() parameter protocol would not be correct,
>> and
>
>What can the compiler do? It has no notion of the relationship of the 2nd
>and 3rd param.
Some programmers here will remember that there is a debugging tool or two that
operates (in part) by checking the range of parameters submitted to Windows
API functions. But those programmers that have used it will recall that it
makes programs run about three times slower than normal, and it's really only
appropriate to run these tests for problems that would show up inside of five
minutes of normal operation, because otherwise the tester / debugger will get
bored waiting for the results. So, even if the compiler were to insert
checking code (or if programmers were to check all parameters), it's clear
that software still isn't running fast enough to do so in a released version.
Alun.
~~~~
[Please don't email posters, if a Usenet response is appropriate.]
-- Texas Imperial Software | Try WFTPD, the Windows FTP Server. Find us at 1602 Harvest Moon Place | http://www.wftpd.com or email alun@texis.com Cedar Park TX 78613-1419 | VISA/MC accepted. NT-based sites, be sure to Fax/Voice +1(512)258-9858 | read details of WFTPD Pro for XP/2000/NT.
- Next message: Ed Thurber: "Re: Distributing critical updates"
- Previous message: Doug Fox: "Re: MBSA v1.1"
- In reply to: Ken Wickes [MS]: "Re: Unchecked Buffer"
- Next in thread: Hector Santos: "Re: Unchecked Buffer"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|