Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!mailrus!ames!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: retiring gets(3)
Message-ID: <8902@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 15 Nov 88 21:05:52 GMT
References: <1988Nov14.220842.3980@utstat.uucp>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 9

In article <1988Nov14.220842.3980@utstat.uucp> geoff@utstat.uucp (Geoff Collyer) writes:
>To be proven: ...

Did you really get through math classes with such a notion of "proof"?
"Any program ... can be corrupted ..." and "There is no protection
possible ..." and "it cannot be used safely ..." are simply stated,
not demonstrated.  In fact they're wrong.  I routinely use gets() in
an utterly safe manner.  I'll let you try to figure out how this can be..
(Hint:  Examine your notion of what is "always" possible.)