Re: [Flightgear-devel] a FIXME in fg_props.cxx
> > > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gene Buckle) [2003.11.12 10:35]:
> > > > code:
> > > >
> > > > static const char *
> > > > getDateString ()
> > > > {
> > > > static char buf[64]; // FIXME
> > > > struct tm * t = globals->get_time_params()->getGmt();
> > > > sprintf(buf, "%.4d-%.2d-%.2dT%.2d:%.2d:%.2d",
> > > > t->tm_year + 1900, t->tm_mon + 1, t->tm_mday,
> > > > t->tm_hour, t->tm_min, t->tm_sec);
> > > > return buf;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Why the FIXME in the declaration of buf? Is there a better way of doing
> > > > that? Is there a buffer overrun concern or something?
> > >
> > > We should at least be using snprintf() here.
> > >
> > So what makes snprintf() a better choice than sprintf()?
> >
> snprintf(buf, buflen, format, ...) will not write more than buflen
> characters (including the trailing '\0') - this protects you against
> a possible buffer overflow . . .
>
> It probably isn't necessary in this case, but it's a Good Habit To
> Get Into(tm).
>
Thanks Simon.
g.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a FIXME in fg_props.cxx
On Thursday 13 November 2003 06:54, Gene Buckle wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Cameron Moore wrote:
> > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gene Buckle) [2003.11.12 10:35]:
> > > static const char *
> > > getDateString ()
> > > {
> > > static char buf[64]; // FIXME
> > > struct tm * t = globals->get_time_params()->getGmt();
> > > sprintf(buf, "%.4d-%.2d-%.2dT%.2d:%.2d:%.2d",
> > > t->tm_year + 1900, t->tm_mon + 1, t->tm_mday,
> > > t->tm_hour, t->tm_min, t->tm_sec);
> > > return buf;
> > > }
> > We should at least be using snprintf() here.
> So what makes snprintf() a better choice than sprintf()?
With snprintf, you can make sure buf will never overflow. Though I guess
it's impossible to overflow buf with the format-string that's used now.
--Ivo
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a FIXME in fg_props.cxx
On Wed, Nov 12, 2003 at 09:54:34PM -0800, Gene Buckle wrote:
>
> On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Cameron Moore wrote:
>
> > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gene Buckle) [2003.11.12 10:35]:
> > > code:
> > >
> > > static const char *
> > > getDateString ()
> > > {
> > > static char buf[64]; // FIXME
> > > struct tm * t = globals->get_time_params()->getGmt();
> > > sprintf(buf, "%.4d-%.2d-%.2dT%.2d:%.2d:%.2d",
> > > t->tm_year + 1900, t->tm_mon + 1, t->tm_mday,
> > > t->tm_hour, t->tm_min, t->tm_sec);
> > > return buf;
> > > }
> > >
> > > Why the FIXME in the declaration of buf? Is there a better way of doing
> > > that? Is there a buffer overrun concern or something?
> >
> > We should at least be using snprintf() here.
> >
> So what makes snprintf() a better choice than sprintf()?
>
snprintf(buf, buflen, format, ...) will not write more than buflen
characters (including the trailing '\0') - this protects you against
a possible buffer overflow . . .
It probably isn't necessary in this case, but it's a Good Habit To
Get Into(tm).
Simon
--
PGP public key Id 0x144A991C, or http://himi.org/stuff/himi.asc
(crappy) Homepage: http://himi.org
doe #237 (see http://www.lemuria.org/DeCSS)
My DeCSS mirror: ftp://himi.org/pub/mirrors/css/
pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a FIXME in fg_props.cxx
On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Cameron Moore wrote:
> * [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gene Buckle) [2003.11.12 10:35]:
> > code:
> >
> > static const char *
> > getDateString ()
> > {
> > static char buf[64]; // FIXME
> > struct tm * t = globals->get_time_params()->getGmt();
> > sprintf(buf, "%.4d-%.2d-%.2dT%.2d:%.2d:%.2d",
> > t->tm_year + 1900, t->tm_mon + 1, t->tm_mday,
> > t->tm_hour, t->tm_min, t->tm_sec);
> > return buf;
> > }
> >
> > Why the FIXME in the declaration of buf? Is there a better way of doing
> > that? Is there a buffer overrun concern or something?
>
> We should at least be using snprintf() here.
>
So what makes snprintf() a better choice than sprintf()?
g.
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
Re: [Flightgear-devel] a FIXME in fg_props.cxx
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Gene Buckle) [2003.11.12 10:35]:
> code:
>
> static const char *
> getDateString ()
> {
> static char buf[64]; // FIXME
> struct tm * t = globals->get_time_params()->getGmt();
> sprintf(buf, "%.4d-%.2d-%.2dT%.2d:%.2d:%.2d",
> t->tm_year + 1900, t->tm_mon + 1, t->tm_mday,
> t->tm_hour, t->tm_min, t->tm_sec);
> return buf;
> }
>
> Why the FIXME in the declaration of buf? Is there a better way of doing
> that? Is there a buffer overrun concern or something?
We should at least be using snprintf() here.
Pardon me while I gripe a moment. It's usually a good idea to put a
description next to a FIXME comment for precisely this reason. It would
be a great help to people who are looking for something to do.
It's also usually a good idea to keep a constant CVS repository so we
can go back and see who added this code and if they said anything in the
cvs-commit message about what is broken. All of the CVS history prior
to Flightgear-0.9.0 is gone. :-/
gripe_mode=0;
--
Cameron Moore
[ I'm ashamed the lead singer of the Dixie Chicks is from Texas. ]
___
Flightgear-devel mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.flightgear.org/mailman/listinfo/flightgear-devel
