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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Thread: 103376,ac4955b8006bd13c
X-Google-NewGroupId: yes
X-Google-Attributes: gida07f3367d7,domainid0,public,usenet
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Received: by 10.68.191.225 with SMTP id hb1mr603910pbc.5.1339026967522;
        Wed, 06 Jun 2012 16:56:07 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Path: 
 l9ni16617pbj.0!nntp.google.com!news2.google.com!goblin1!goblin3!goblin.stu.neva.ru!gegeweb.org!news.ecp.fr!news.jacob-sparre.dk!munin.jacob-sparre.dk!pnx.dk!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Randy Brukardt" <randy@rrsoftware.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: Q: type ... is new String
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 18:56:03 -0500
Organization: Jacob Sparre Andersen Research & Innovation
Message-ID: <jqoqmm$8hf$1@munin.nbi.dk>
References: <jq5i58$qe8$1@speranza.aioe.org> <jqi6qb$oms$1@dont-email.me>
 <82defba0-2d39-4418-b678-ebbefeb105d7@x21g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>
 <4fcccd1f$0$6583$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <ljq3c42wn6kg.137fdbql13gf0$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4fccdd0c$0$6578$9b4e6d93@newsspool3.arcor-online.net>
 <zsk0ul695neq.184hx8ckz554b$.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4fcd20dd$0$9519$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <1tr1nuc1xy9mp$.d5s1fz9vuczz.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4fcdc605$0$9524$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
 <1ch26v7folac1$.1gc355i72r55j.dlg@40tude.net>
 <4fcdf97f$0$9521$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: static-69-95-181-76.mad.choiceone.net
X-Trace: munin.nbi.dk 1339026966 8751 69.95.181.76 (6 Jun 2012 23:56:06 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: news@jacob-sparre.dk
NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 23:56:06 +0000 (UTC)
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5931
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157
X-RFC2646: Format=Flowed; Original
Date: 2012-06-06T18:56:03-05:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

"Georg Bauhaus" <rm.dash-bauhaus@futureapps.de> wrote in message 
news:4fcdf97f$0$9521$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net...
> On 05.06.12 11:06, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
>
>>> (All I see is subsequences of 2#bbbb_bbbb#. For the AI part,
>>> I am told to produce the most likely information that the
>>> originator might have intended to send.)
>>
>> Bad design. Don't do that.
>
> How is producing the most likely information from a piece
> of data bad design? And who am I to say "I don't do that"?

It's bad design. Malformed input should always be rejected, period. Any 
other situation leads to zillions of security holes. And if you're not 
willing to say "don't do that", let me do so for you. :-)

I'm well aware that pragmatic requirements might force you into a bad design 
(as I had to in order to not block my own mail because of malformed Outlook 
messages). But that doesn't magically make the design good, it's still 
garbage.

                                Randy.