From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 21513 invoked by alias); 17 Nov 2010 01:08:29 -0000 Received: (qmail 21502 invoked by uid 22791); 17 Nov 2010 01:08:28 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO gcc.gnu.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:08:24 +0000 From: "noloader at gmail dot com" To: gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org Subject: [Bug c++/46513] Request: Warning for use of unsafe string handling functions X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: gcc X-Bugzilla-Component: c++ X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: enhancement X-Bugzilla-Who: noloader at gmail dot com X-Bugzilla-Status: UNCONFIRMED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P3 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: unassigned at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 01:25:00 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gcc-bugs-help@gcc.gnu.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: Sender: gcc-bugs-owner@gcc.gnu.org X-SW-Source: 2010-11/txt/msg02141.txt.bz2 http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=46513 --- Comment #2 from Jeffrey Walton 2010-11-17 01:08:22 UTC --- Hi Jonathan, (In reply to comment #1) > The maintainers of GNU libc, the C and C++ committees and the POSIX working > group have not seen fit to include those functions, and they're not available > on my GNU/Linux box. Interesting. In 2010, I was hoping the strl* functions would side step the political mess of TR24731-1 on *nix. For those resisting, TR24731-1 is now a normative part of the C1x draft (as Annex K), so its coming whether they want it or not :/ Never the less, a warning would still be useful since lots of code still employs the unsafe functions. For those who are inclined - such as myself and others who perform security related audits - a compiler warning would be a welcome addition, even if there is no standard replacement. I'll tackle "what to replace it with" in-turn on the specific platform. Jeff