On 4/7/2014 10:17 PM, Orvid King wrote:
On Mon, 07 Apr 2014 20:59:50 -0500, Ary Borenszweig
<[email protected]> wrote:
On 4/7/14, 8:28 PM, w0rp wrote:
http://heartbleed.com/
This bug has been getting around. The bug was caused by missing bounds
checking.
I'm glad to be using a language with bounds checking.
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/cged2y6
I think that flag shouldn't exist.
The bad thing is, I have some code that having bounds checks enabled
actually improves the speed of.
Not surprised, but I imagine it's likely only a handful of places where
the bounds checking is actually slowing things down noticeably. If you
sniffed those out with a profiler and had a good way to get around
bounds checking for those specific cases, I'd bet you'd get nearly the
same speedup without sacrificing much safety.
