Klaas-Jan Stol wrote on 05/03/2007 16:48:
On 3/5/07, jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
i disagree. the reason C, C and C were
deprecated is because they're non-ansi. therefore, microsoft renamed
it to C<_strdup>. since we've pledged ansi (aka c89) c compliance, we
should be following a simila
On 3/5/07, Philip Taylor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
For the string functions which it does claim are unsafe (strcpy, strcat,
etc), it warns "This function or variable may be unsafe. Consider using
strcpy_s instead" and provides the _s alternatives; but strdup isn't one
of those functions. A call
I believe that VS2005 Has a new snprintf_s, strcpy_s etc that are
suppose to be secure
See:
http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/8ef0s5kh(VS.80).aspx.
http://forums.microsoft.com/MSDN/ShowPost.aspx?PostID=6995&SiteID=1.
Kevin
Philip Taylor wrote:
Klaas-Jan Stol wrote on 05/03/2007 16:48:
On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 05:48:57PM +0100, Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
> On 3/5/07, jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >instead of disabling the *valid* compiler warning, i suggest that
> >either we modify our coding standard to allow C, or we rename
> >all usage to C<_strdup> and #define as appropri
On 3/5/07, jerry gay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 3/5/07, Kevin Tew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Defining _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE on the compiler command line is
> probably the right solution here.
> Kevin
>
i disagree. the reason C, C and C were
deprecated is because they're non-ansi. therefo
On 3/5/07, Kevin Tew <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Defining _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE on the compiler command line is
probably the right solution here.
Kevin
i disagree. the reason C, C and C were
deprecated is because they're non-ansi. therefore, microsoft renamed
it to C<_strdup>. since we've ple
Defining _CRT_SECURE_NO_DEPRECATE on the compiler command line is
probably the right solution here.
Kevin
Klaas-Jan Stol wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT wrote:
Hi,
Applied in 17281, thanks.
For your question, strdup is fine since these are not garbage
collectable strings (STRING*), just norm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] via RT wrote:
Hi,
Applied in 17281, thanks.
For your question, strdup is fine since these are not garbage
collectable strings (STRING*), just normal C char*'s. There is loads of
them used in IMCC. Unfortunately though, there is an issue in that we
don't free a load of 'em, or
