Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.carno.net.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!news.rmit.EDU.AU!goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au!news.apana.org.au!cantor.edge.net.au!news.teragen.com.au!news.access.net.au!news.mel.connect.com.au!munnari.OZ.AU!news.ecn.uoknor.edu!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!newsxfer.itd.umich.edu!uunet!in3.uu.net!206.63.63.70!nwnews.wa.com!brokaw.wa.com!not-for-mail From: Ken Pizzini <ken@halcyon.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Subject: Re: What does gets() unsafe question mean? Date: 8 Mar 1997 08:31:40 GMT Organization: _ Lines: 18 Message-ID: <5fr85c$e14$5@brokaw.wa.com> References: <01bc2a8f$67037120$db083ccc@default> <331F980F.7767@ici.net> <33206DE9.14B5@ix.netcom.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coho.halcyon.com Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.lang.c:195618 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:36728 In article <33206DE9.14B5@ix.netcom.com>, Richard Scranton <scrantr@ix.netcom.com> wrote: >Recent versions of gcc have included this "feature" in an attempt to >educate the unwashed masses (us) that not considering the effects of >a possible buffer overrun is a bad thing. Back around v1.3mumble, the >gcc guys thought that #pragma was a bad thing, and therefore supported >in the their own "implementation defined" manner. Upon encountering >a #pragma anything it would immediately halt the compilation and try >to run Hack or Rogue, and if those failed, start emacs with the Tower >of Hanoi lisp macro running. I suppose strong opinions are better >than no opinions... I agree that their reaction to #pragma was absurd, but IMHO their solution to gets() [and getwd(), and perhaps others] seems quite reasonable. A simple warning message, which one ignores at one's own peril. --Ken Pizzini