From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,HEADER_SPAM
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,b30bd69fa8f63cb2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: fc772,b30bd69fa8f63cb2
X-Google-Attributes: gidfc772,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2003-06-05 08:56:02 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!logbridge.uoregon.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!not-for-mail
From: =?Windows-1252?Q?Terje_Sletteb=F8?= <tslettebo@chello.no.nospam>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++.moderated
Subject: Re: C bug of the day
Date: 5 Jun 2003 11:58:13 -0400
Organization: unknown
Sender: cppmods@netlab.cs.rpi.edu
Message-ID: <CRDDa.10236$KF1.144182@amstwist00>
References: <sUUCa.41207$fT5.6121@nwrdny01.gnilink.net>
 <3EDCCE72.4020707@cogeco.ca>
 <bbkcln$af6e1$1@ID-133164.news.dfncis.de>
 <1054751321.434656@master.nyc.kbcfp.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: netlab.cs.rpi.edu
X-Original-Date: Thu, 5 Jun 2003 11:16:50 +0200
X-Submission-Address: c++-submit@netlab.cs.rpi.edu
X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.lang.c++.moderated
	iQBVAwUAPt9okUHMCo9UcraBAQH/oQIAplSfZHE6ZgqBd1k0D3j8agOcP4b2DIbs
	4eLla1vRv8ZLoXnMmUxQ45j/BJycdO0MBPLLdrDs+9LWbGNPpsz9DQ==
	=3EiN
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:38692 comp.lang.c++.moderated:67800
Date: 2003-06-05T11:58:13-04:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Hyman Rosen" <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote in message
news:1054751321.434656@master.nyc.kbcfp.com...
> Peter van Merkerk wrote:
>  > Would you care to explain why "C++ is not safe because of the STL"?
>
> He misphrased his English somewhat. He means that "just because C++
> has the STL, that does not make it safe", alluding to the leagcy C
> stuff that is present.

Ah. Well, that depends of course on how you program. If you use safer
things in C++, then you can avoid the problems of the C library
functions.

There's also a "Proposal for Technical Report on C++ Standard Library
Security"
(http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2003/n1425.pdf),
which mainly has to do with giving safer alternative functions to the
more dangerous C functions in the C++ standard library. Yet, there are
typically better ways of doing this in C++, than to use these functions.


Regards,

Terje

      [ Send an empty e-mail to c++-help@netlab.cs.rpi.edu for info ]
      [ about comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: do this! ]