Date: Sun, 1 Sep 2019 14:20:58 -0700 From: Conrad Meyer <cem@freebsd.org> To: Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> Cc: src-committers <src-committers@freebsd.org>, svn-src-all <svn-src-all@freebsd.org>, svn-src-head <svn-src-head@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r351659 - in head: contrib/libc++/include contrib/netbsd-tests/lib/libc/ssp gnu/lib/libssp include lib/libc/stdio Message-ID: <CAG6CVpVMN6BkATaz7qqhaVHhUpqQLrP3kSWHpMzPz2AR5GnaQw@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <201909011932.x81JWYts004074@slippy.cwsent.com> References: <201909011612.x81GC5DW097846@repo.freebsd.org> <201909011932.x81JWYts004074@slippy.cwsent.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Sep 1, 2019 at 12:32 PM Cy Schubert <Cy.Schubert@cschubert.com> wrote: > In message <201909011612.x81GC5DW097846@repo.freebsd.org>, Ed Maste writes: > > Author: emaste > > Date: Sun Sep 1 16:12:05 2019 > > New Revision: 351659 > > URL: https://svnweb.freebsd.org/changeset/base/351659 > > > > Log: > > libc: remove gets > > ... > > Should we encourage the use of gets_s() in the man page or in other doc? Hi Cy, Short version: no, we shouldn't. :-) Longer version: Annex K functions like gets_s have zero real adoption (Microsoft's APIs that inspired Annex K are not actually compatible with the version in the standards); broadly terrible APIs; and in this particular case and others, unnecessarily duplicate the functionality of existing long-standing standard C functions (e.g., fgets(3)). Also, it's been a *long* time since gets(3) was known to be extremely broken and rejected by -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE and friends; at least twenty years just going by the C99 standard. I don't think developers need an advisory about using alternatives to gets(3) at this point in time. Best, Conrad
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CAG6CVpVMN6BkATaz7qqhaVHhUpqQLrP3kSWHpMzPz2AR5GnaQw>