On Sun, Sep 7, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Andy Dougherty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sat, 6 Sep 2008, Christoph Otto via RT wrote:
>
>> On Wed May 10 11:01:34 2006, stmpeters wrote:
>> >
>> > I'm taking a look at it. I should have something working this evening
>> > for the configs. Adding the HAS_BLAH's will take some additional time.
>> >
>> > Steve Peters
>> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>
>>
>> "when useful" is vague does not indicate why the extra configuration
>> machinery is justified by whatever benefit we'd get from using these
>> functions. If someone would like to make the requirements a little
>> tighter or make the case for implementing this request (or even
>> implement it), they'd be encouraged. Otherwise this ticket isn't very
>> useful.
>> It would be good to either go somewhere with this or reject this request.
>
> These functions are typically used in place of the plain sprintf and
> strcat family as a way to be explicitly careful about buffer overflows.
> Plain sprintf and strcat are both widely used in the parrot source.
> Replacing them when it would ease future maintenance and help ensure
> parrot is not susceptible to buffer overflows is a quite sensible path
> forward.
>
> As you correctly observe, no one has actually done anything about it yet.
> That doesn't mean it's not worth doing, however.
>
> I'd say it should simply stay as an open ticket.
>
+1
~jerry
