On Mar 04, Joseph Carter wrote: > The stated reasons that strl functions will not be included are: > > - They promote bad or less readable code > - They are "inefficient BSD crap" > - They do not enhance security in any meaningful capacity > > While I'm not likely to argue on the third point (except out of rampant > paranoia that it's possible that maybe you could get a printf to feed you > output that you as a user should not be able to see, maybe a passwd or > something?), the other two reasons are not really reasons - they're BSD > bashing. While I have tons of reasons to bash BSD, OpenBSD particularly, > the strl functions are not among them. Silly me thought the purpose of GNU libc was to provide a superset of the functionality of other libcs... hence the strl functions ought to be there, if only for completeness. Otherwise, we (those of us who think OpenBSD actually has some good code in it worth running on Linux) have to add a silly "libbsd" again, just for compat purposes. Yeah, Theo is a real butthead sometimes, but this reminds me of silly Not Invented Here bashing. Chris -- Chris Lawrence <cnlawren@olemiss.edu> - http://www.lordsutch.com/chris/ Instructor and Ph.D. Candidate, Political Science, Univ. of Mississippi 208 Deupree Hall - 662-915-5765
Attachment:
pgpQkWbxIpEU6.pgp
Description: PGP signature