This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Implementation of C11 Bounds-checking interfaces
- From: Paul Eggert <eggert at cs dot ucla dot edu>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal dot cx>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Thu, 01 Nov 2012 12:50:32 -0700
- Subject: Re: Implementation of C11 Bounds-checking interfaces
- References: <509132DA.9060503@sba-research.org> <CAE2sS1iRjP4FakjCCJ4tRA90UdUY-sd+eU9h27h_Hm89r7_VDA@mail.gmail.com> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1210311714370.7365@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20121031175631.GE20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1210311812360.7365@digraph.polyomino.org.uk> <20121031182222.GF20323@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <Pine.LNX.4.64.1210312038040.31881@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
On 10/31/2012 01:40 PM, Joseph S. Myers wrote:
> Having what are ostensibly variants of the same function behave
> incompatibly like that seems a very bad idea to me.
Not only is it a bad idea, it would seem to contradict C11
section K.3.5.3.3 paragraph 4, which says that printf_s must
be equivalent to printf except for the runtime-constraint
checking.