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=-0.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 107f24,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid107f24,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 1014db,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,582dff0b3f065a52
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-06 09:57:54 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!sn-xit-03!supernews.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!nntp-server.caltech.edu!wnoise
From: wnoise@ugcs.caltech.edu (Aaron Denney)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.functional
Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of
    service attack.
Date: 6 Aug 2001 16:42:43 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Message-ID: <slrn9mti83.ljs.wnoise@barter.ugcs.caltech.edu>
References: <bebbba07.0107292308.d1192fc@posting.google.com>
 <9k9if8$rn3$1@elf.eng.bsdi.com> <GHEt6A.BzD@approve.se>
 <3B687EDF.9359F3FC@mediaone.net> <GHFDJp.G7q@approve.se>
 <slrn9mi1q3.7kb.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <PNha7.3185$e%4.96222@news3.oke.nextra.no>
 <5267be60.0108021911.7d8fe4@posting.google.com>
 <cOHa7.3620$e%4.107328@news3.oke.nextra.no>
 <3B6B637F.E3FA243E@worldnet.att.net>
 <xpTa7.3738$e%4.109789@news3.oke.nextra.no>
 <fGxb7.333$NJ6.577@www.newsranger.com>
 <3b6ea164.1479721766@news.worldonline.nl> <wi68zgxcjts.fsf@merlin.irisa.fr>
Reply-To: wnoise@ugcs.caltech.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: barter.ugcs.caltech.edu
User-Agent: slrn/0.9.6.2 (Linux)
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11392 comp.lang.c:72490
 comp.lang.c++:80361 comp.lang.functional:7353
Date: 2001-08-06T16:42:43+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 06 Aug 2001 17:02:55 +0200, Yoann Padioleau <padiolea@merlin.irisa.fr> wrote:
> info@hoekstra-uitgeverij.nl (Richard Bos) writes:
> > Ted Dennison<dennison@telepath.com> wrote:
> > > compiler. Remember, "printf" actually has to stop and interpret
> > > the input string to look for replacements.
> > 
> > No, it doesn't; not unless the format string isn't a constant.
>
> Yes it does. The source code from printf is in the C library, so the compiler
> cant optimise code such as 'printf("%d    %f   %s",i,f,str)', he cant
> generate print_int(i);print_space(4);print_float(f);....
> This is called partial evaluation, and in practice it is hard to put
> in a compiler.

In a C compiler, sure.  This is also posted to comp.lang.functional
and many compilers for functional languages will do partial evaluation
at compile-time routinely.

-- 
Aaron Denney
-><-