Re: [Boost-users] C++ and quality of software

Subject: Re: [Boost-users] C++ and quality of software
From: Larry (lknain_at_[hidden])
Date: 2010-01-25 18:55:05

I have been developing software since the 1960's and in my experience the 
ones that complain
the most either are the worst offenders of making readable code or are one 
of the very few that
write code that mere mortals have trouble understanding (readable here 
meaning to someone
other than the originator of the code). If you are trying to maintain 
several MLoc of code then
guidellines such as the Google guidelines can help with consistency in form 
as newer programmers
come on to maintain the code or add new function. I worked for a company 
that had guidelines
since the 1960's. The "rules" were not static but evolved over time and were 
adapted as new
languages became the basis of development. I do not recall an instance where 
the guidelines
inhibited the development of good sound code.

As for the fixed length buffers they are diminishing but there are probably 
lots of them still out there
that just haven't shown up as security issues. Still, a lot of issues still 
show up - not necessarily in OS
code but code perhaps just as critical.

Much of this discussion will be similar to a discussion of  "good and evil" 
as there is no one answer.

Larry

"There is nothing either good or bad but thinking makes it so."  - William 
Shakespeare, "Hamlet", Act II, Scene V

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Peter Foelsche" <foelsche_at_[hidden]>
To: <boost-users_at_[hidden]>
Cc: <boost_at_[hidden]>
Sent: Monday, January 25, 2010 5:28 PM
Subject: Re: [Boost-users] C++ and quality of software

>
> "Marshall Clow" <mclow.lists_at_[hidden]> wrote in message 
> news:D43C711F-03E0-4A3C-BE40-BA99BE379F30_at_gmail.com...
>
>> Exceptions
>> â–¶ We do not use C++ exceptions.
>>
>> Run-Time Type Information (RTTI)
>> â–¶ We do not use Run Time Type Information (RTTI).
>
>
> I think this is an embarrasement for google.
> Didn't they claim to hire only very good people?
> I would not want to work under these conditions.
>
> If there is again some security hole due to a buffer overflow,
> such an institution could claim, that software using fixed-sized-buffers 
> would not get their stamp of approval.
> And that the customer should be looking and asking for this stamp of 
> approval when buying software.
>
> How many fixed sized buffers are in the main OSs?
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Boost-users mailing list
> Boost-users_at_[hidden]
> http://lists.boost.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/boost-users