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-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,bc1361a952ec75ca X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-08-07 21:44:43 PST Path: archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!feed.textport.net!sn-xit-04!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: "David Starner" Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Subject: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red Code distributed denial of service attack. Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2001 04:39:29 +0100 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: References: <3b690498.1111845720@news.worldonline.nl> <9kbu15$9bj@augusta.math.psu.edu> <9kbvsr$a02@augusta.math.psu.edu> <3B69DB35.4412459E@home.com> <3B6F312F.DA4E178E@home.com> <9kpa4f$j2n$1@nh.pace.co.uk> <9kpnp0$o0o$1@nh.pace.co.uk> X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400 X-Complaints-To: newsabuse@supernews.com Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:11575 Date: 2001-08-08T04:39:29+01:00 List-Id: "Marin David Condic" wrote in message news:9kpnp0$o0o$1@nh.pace.co.uk... > Anything GNAT.* is not going to be accepted across compilers. You may have > an equivalent Aonix.*, etc., but I doubt Aonix wants to be tied to something > GNAT-ish. It would obviously be more acceptable if it was Ada.*. Hence the > idea was being brought up that maybe there should be some kind of "Standard > Library" to do this. I understand that any general package can't be named GNAT.*. (One solution to this problem might be someone offering a root name, foo.*, and getting someone to register interfaces under that name, so compiler people could add useful small packages there and share them among compilers.) Note that the suggested interface was not GNAT.Directory_Ops - I currently have a bug report in the Debian BTS about that package taking strings and sliently truncating the file name if needed to fit in the string, with it being painful to go back and re-get a name with a larger buffer. > While I don't think I've seen one in a *very* long time, there were > operating systems that had file systems that did not include heierarchical > directories. I'm not sure that GNAT.Directory_Ops would be suited to that. In my proposed system, Is_Directory returns False on everything, and the procedure that returns a list does the same thing it does when offered a plain file on any system. > I'm not sure that it would be necessary - after all, if you were on > Windows/Unix/VMS/OS-2/Macintosh and this works in all those places that > probably covers some massive percentage of users. No need to be portable to > *everything*. But if you want to make something "Standard" it ought to fit > most popular platforms. What's most popular? Windows/OS-2/Macintosh/VMS/Posix-like seems like a pretty safe bet, right now at least. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org "The pig -- belongs -- to _all_ mankind!" - Invader Zim