Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns

From: Mok-Kong Shen (mok-kong.shen_at_t-online.de)
Date: 01/30/05 

Date: Sun, 30 Jan 2005 02:41:06 +0100

Douglas A. Gwyn wrote:

> Mok-Kong Shen wrote:
>
>> The point I wanted to bring forth is that one don't even
>> need a library for certain stuff that is already incorporated
>> in some PL (within the standard) itself. For a library would
>> frequently have portability/update problems in practice and
>> one may not be very sure of its bug-freeness. So, if there
>> is something already standardized, it is 'generally' better
>> to make use of that rather than using something else that is
>> not standardized (assuming, of course that there is a choice).
>
>
> That's utterly wrong. If the library you're talking
> about is implemented only using completely standard
> features of the language, it is no riskier to use it
> than it is to use any other aspect of the PL standard.
> In fact, if standardized library functions are not
> suitable for the application's requirements, then it
> would be a hideous error to use them in that context.

Have you ever experienced even compiler bugs?

M. K. Shen

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Implicit int
    ... Douglas A. Gwyn wrote: ... But, Microsoft Visual C++ for Win64 wanted to keep a backward compatibility with buggy programs assuming the ILP32 model, and provided the LLP64 model, with size_t as typedef of unsigned long long. ... However, when Microsoft provides a Win128 platform and break the C99 standard by keeping uintmax_t 64 bits and typedef size_t to __uint128, would the next C standard standardize this behavior? ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: Public disclosure of discovered vulnerabilities
    ... Douglas A. Gwyn wrote: ... >David Wagner wrote: ... >> entire C Standard, and understood its every obscure little corner case. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Implicit int
    ... And that was one of the PRIMARY reasons that made Microsoft make its buggy model. ... Douglas A. Gwyn wrote: ... And, if this is 80% of people, C implementation will want to keep backward compatiblity with these inept pieces of code, and the C standard will standardize this behavior, because it standardizes existing practice. ...
    (comp.std.c)
  • Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns
    ... Douglas A. Gwyn wrote: ... > Then go use some language other than C. ... I guess that you erred (i.e. wronly interpreted the standard ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: [OT] Iraq
    ... To Douglas' point, let's look at Bush's "No Child Left Behind" ... This program is supposed to set a standard for how ... children's education is progressing, i.e., how it is measured. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)