All threads here get hijacked eventually. Some sooner than others. From responses that __I__ have received from IBM in the past, they tend not to implement "in flux" stuff. And, they basically say "give us a business case to implement ... and we will prioritize it with other requests." What they mean by "business case" is "how this will make us money" (reasonable). The safe functions are not a standard. They are in a TR status. I don't really know what that means. I am sure that once they become an ANSI/ISO standard, IBM will implement them (eventually).
I had not realized that the safe functions have one major plus over the "n" functions. They guarantee that the \0 can be copied too. And that the source will fit in the dest area before doing anything at all. -- John McKown Systems Engineer IV IT Administrative Services Group HealthMarkets(r) 9151 Boulevard 26 * N. Richland Hills * TX 76010 (817) 255-3225 phone * (817)-961-6183 cell [email protected] * www.HealthMarkets.com Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. HealthMarkets(r) is the brand name for products underwritten and issued by the insurance subsidiaries of HealthMarkets, Inc. -The Chesapeake Life Insurance Company(r), Mid-West National Life Insurance Company of TennesseeSM and The MEGA Life and Health Insurance Company.SM > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Charles Mills > Sent: Friday, December 04, 2009 11:01 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Is there a good mailing list or forum for > mainframe C/C++ specifically? > > Gosh, there is no question that can't be hijacked into something else. > > Thank you to all the people who suggested I use the C++ > classes. Yes, yes, I > am well aware of the string class. It does not do everything. > There are > times when char[] makes more sense and/or must be used. When > doing so, it > pays to be as "safe" as possible. Yes, it is possible to be > "safe" without > using "safe" functions, but the same could be said of any > helpful tool in > software: "you don't really need it -- you can accomplish the > same thing > other ways." > > Thank you to all the people who used this thread to remind us > that Microsoft > is the evil empire. I might suggest that all IBM would have > to do to defeat > MS's nefarious plot to take over the world would be to > implement about half > a dozen small library functions that MS has proposed as > additions to the C++ > standard. > > Thank you also to the one person who gave a helpful answer to > the question I > actually asked and suggested a possibly relevant mailing list. > > Charles ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
