Path: utzoo!utgpu!attcan!uunet!mcvax!hp4nl!botter!star.cs.vu.nl!maart
From: maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: gets(3) nonsense
Message-ID: <1643@solo11.cs.vu.nl>
Date: 10 Nov 88 18:37:31 GMT
References: <867@cernvax.UUCP> <645@quintus.UUCP> <339@igor.Rational.COM> <14447@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: maart@cs.vu.nl (Maarten Litmaath)
Organization: VU Informatica, Amsterdam
Lines: 16

In article <14447@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
\In article <339@igor.Rational.COM> dsb@Rational.COM (David S. Bakin) writes:
\>[What's going on?  The article I'm replying to was signed by Chris Torek of
\> uunet!mimsy!chris but the headers say it is from ok@quintus.uucp???]
\
\I have no idea why that happened.

It's the `virus'! (Who said it was dead? :-)

And now the real point: let's stop complaining about the gets(3) semantics of
not checking buffer boundaries; this is precisely what was intended.
Does anyone suggest doing away with strcpy() too?
Or /bin/rm, being destructive?
-- 
George Bush:                          |Maarten Litmaath @ VU Amsterdam:
             Capt. Slip of the Tongue |maart@cs.vu.nl, mcvax!botter!maart