Author: Andrei Fortuna
Date: 08:49:31 09/22/04
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2004 at 10:55:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >I'd stick with Eugene here. I'd rather get flagged for something that looks >suspicious, and have to take explicit action to get away with it, rather than to >accept known problematic code unless the user is sophisticated enough to specify >that such code should produce a diagnostic. The inexperienced programmer needs >all the help he can get. The experienced programmer will already be playing >with compiler options for optimization tricks... Sounds right to me, but isn't this thinking producing compilers that do not comply to ISO C/C++ with default settings ? sprintf & co of "unsecure" functions are still part of C/C++ standard libs ...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.