From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 6179 invoked by alias); 10 Aug 2014 07:52:53 -0000 Mailing-List: contact libc-alpha-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: libc-alpha-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 6166 invoked by uid 89); 10 Aug 2014 07:52:52 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Virus-Found: No X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-3.5 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,SPF_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 X-HELO: mx2.suse.de Message-ID: <53E724B6.3000608@suse.com> Date: Sun, 10 Aug 2014 07:52:00 -0000 From: Andreas Jaeger User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: dwheeler@dwheeler.com, libc-alpha Subject: Re: Implement C11 annex K? References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SW-Source: 2014-08/txt/msg00134.txt.bz2 On 08/09/2014 10:51 PM, David A. Wheeler wrote: > I may have someone who'd be willing to develop and submit at least a portion of ISO C11 annex K. The glibc front page says that glibc "follows all relevant standards including ISO C11 and POSIX.1-2008". Should I presume that such a submission would be considered, and accepted if high enough quality? Or would annex K (strcpy_s and friends) be automatically rejected, even though it's in the standard? If implementing the standard would be automatically rejected, then I don't want to waste this person's time. > > I think annex K *should* be supported by glibc. Please see the archives of this mailing list for previous discussions about these functions. This is something we rejected previously but I don't recall the details, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Jeff Hawn,Jennifer Guild,Felix Imendörffer,HRB16746 (AG Nürnberg) GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126