Re: [Lit.] Buffer overruns

From: infobahn (infobahn_at_btinternet.com)
Date: 02/01/05 

Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2005 16:54:45 +0000 (UTC)

Hank Oredson wrote:
>
> "infobahn" <infobahn@btinternet.com> wrote in message
> news:41FF431A.70E790C@btinternet.com...
> >
> > Perhaps this is why some code reviewers don't find buffer
> > overrun bugs. They've been warned off.
>
> This is not a very common problem, in my experience.

Nor in mine. I was just all-guns-blazing, I'm afraid. Mr Wagner
has apologised, and I gladly retract the above observation.

> I've been on both sides of code reviews a LOT of times.
> When on the receiving end my usual response is either an
> explanation that everyone understands and agress with,
> or a simple "Thank you! Thank you! You saved my ***!".

Absolutely.

> This should be normal and expected behavior at the code review.
> Anyone who responds otherwise should be re-assigned to
> some task other than programming.

Abs... oh, I said that already.

>
> Discussed this thread with my wife last night. She had a lot
> of interesting comments about my observations. The one
> she fizzed most about was the comment somewhere way
> up (or down) thread about "unexpected interactions" at
> module integration time. "WHAT! They did not clearly
> define the interfaces, then prototype and test anything that
> was even slightly in question? Fire their ass."

<g> Is she for hire?

NO! I didn't mean it that way! I didn'54gfs88d2E''#23 buffer overrun
detected; application terminated.

Quantcast