This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: [RFC] [PATCH] Support explicit_bzero, memset_s, memzero_explicit, or similar.

Rich Felker wrote:
I don't recall any such consensus,

Well, to be fair I didn't call it a consensus, only a "most favored suggestion". I agree it didn't have consensus.

there's a huge
difference in adding an interface that conflicts with he requriements
of Annex K (even if glibc doesn't want to support Annex K now or for
the forseeable future), and adding one which simply does not support
all the 'features' specified in Annex K but matches the semantics for
the features it does support.

That goes only so far. Suppose the spec for plain traditional strcpy were in Annex K, and glibc supplied a strcpy implementation that mostly worked, except it failed to copy the trailing null byte. I doubt whether users would be satisfied with the justification "well, this doesn't *conflict* with the spec, and it's *partial* support for the standard". Similarly for a memset_s that fails to throw an exception if you invoke it with invalid arguments.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]