[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values
From: |
Bruno Haible |
Subject: |
Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values |
Date: |
Mon, 18 Jun 2012 15:06:58 +0200 |
User-agent: |
KMail/4.7.4 (Linux/3.1.10-1.9-desktop; KDE/4.7.4; x86_64; ; ) |
John Spencer wrote:
> its not the job of the libc to make broken code happy.
>
> i dont think its a good idea to make thousands of correct programs slower,
> just that GNU guys dont have to fix one program.
Following your argumentation, we don't need
- W^X protection in the x86 hardware,
- address space layout randomization in the kernel,
- support for -fstack-protector, -fmudflag, and -fbounds-check in gcc
and libc,
- double-free checks in libc,
- function pointer encryption in libc.
We don't need all this, because broken programs are easily identified
and all other programs are correct, right?
Read <http://cansecwest.com/csw08/csw08-holtmann.pdf>.
Bruno
- Re: gnulib portability issues, (continued)
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Bruno Haible, 2012/06/17
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Rich Felker, 2012/06/17
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Paul Eggert, 2012/06/17
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, John Spencer, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values,
Bruno Haible <=
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, John Spencer, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Paul Eggert, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, John Spencer, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Eric Blake, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, John Spencer, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Paul Eggert, 2012/06/18
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, John Spencer, 2012/06/19
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Eric Blake, 2012/06/19
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Jim Meyering, 2012/06/19
- Re: isnanl, printf, and non-IEEE values, Paul Eggert, 2012/06/19