Re: Xcode/gcc help in enforcing secure coding?
Re: Xcode/gcc help in enforcing secure coding?
- Subject: Re: Xcode/gcc help in enforcing secure coding?
- From: "John C. Daub" <email@hidden>
- Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 10:32:07 -0500
- Thread-topic: Xcode/gcc help in enforcing secure coding?
on 8/15/06 3:44 AM, Steve Checkoway at email@hidden wrote:
> Apple, if you're listening, please, PLEASE do not mark standard
> library functions deprecated that really aren't. I'm understand the
> desire for some of the more dangerous functions but strlen is _not_
> deprecated and microsoft pretending that it is is simply stupid. It's
> very annoying to use a standard function only to find that other
> people on the project using Windows cannot build because MS has
> decided to remove/rename/deprecate the function.
Well, they sorta are depreciated in the sense that they are security
problems and there are better alternatives.
But this is why in my original request I thought it'd be nice for it to be
some sort of optional gcc warning. So using something like the gcc
attributes may not be the right way to go since I don't believe you could
directly control that as a compiler option. I'd rather the compiler know
about it and if the option to emit a warning is on to do so. Thus those of
us that care about removing/preventing all/any uses in our code can use the
warning and care, and those that want to still use them can.
I don't think they should be removed, but part of the point of a compiler is
to help us catch mistakes earlier in the development process. So if it could
help here, great.
--
John C. Daub }:-)>=
<mailto:email@hidden> <http://www.hsoi.com/>
"I shoot back." -- Ted Nugent
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Xcode-users mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden