Bugtraq mailing list archives
Re: strcpy versus strncpy
From: ben () ALGROUP CO UK (Ben Laurie)
Date: Tue, 3 Mar 1998 18:50:52 +0000
Edwin Li-Kai Liu wrote:
If you use C++, you can write a string class (I think someone already did that? M$?) that uses dynamic buffer allocation and upon object destruction the buffer is released. This will prevent memory hole, but performance suffers!
The string class is part of the Standard C++ Library (or is it STL? Whatever, it is standard). Cheers, Ben. -- Ben Laurie |Phone: +44 (181) 735 0686| Apache Group member Freelance Consultant |Fax: +44 (181) 735 0689|http://www.apache.org and Technical Director|Email: ben () algroup co uk | A.L. Digital Ltd, |Apache-SSL author http://www.apache-ssl.org/ London, England. |"Apache: TDG" http://www.ora.com/catalog/apache
Current thread:
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy, (continued)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Mark Walker (Mar 03)
- updatedb: sort patch Michael Ballbach (Mar 02)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Eivind Eklund (Mar 03)
- Vulnerabilites in some versions of info2www CGI Niall Smart (Mar 03)
- Universal Wrapper Willy TARREAU (Mar 03)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Victor Lavrenko (Mar 03)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Chris L. Mason (Mar 03)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Mark Whitis (Mar 04)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Andy Church (Mar 02)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Edwin Li-Kai Liu (Mar 03)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Ben Laurie (Mar 03)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Chris L. Mason (Mar 03)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy der Mouse (Mar 04)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Aleph One (Mar 04)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Aleph One (Mar 04)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Aleph One (Mar 04)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Aleph One (Mar 04)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy der Mouse (Mar 05)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Nick Maclaren (Mar 05)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Steve Bellovin (Mar 05)
- Re: strcpy versus strncpy Paul McNabb (Mar 05)