From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <20030501160047.7231.qmail@g.bio.cse.psu.edu>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] same functions everywhere
In-Reply-To: Message from "Douglas A. Gwyn" <DAGwyn@null.net>
   of "Thu, 01 May 2003 09:07:45 GMT." <3EB09B8A.3090103@null.net>
From: Scott Schwartz <schwartz@bio.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Thu,  1 May 2003 12:00:47 -0400
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 9cde6cb2-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

| Scott Schwartz wrote:
| > | > Can Plan 9 libraries throw such exceptions? where does this functionality
| > | > exist?
| > | Doug is thinking ahead to C1x.
| > Tell Doug that the committee should be thinking about a standard counted
| > string/array mechanism instead.
|
| Why?

Because I think the main problem C has is buffer overruns, and I believe
that the main cause of that is that people use C arrays, pointers,
which don't encode the bounds, along with standard library routines that
discourage doing anything else.

My hypothesis is that if there were an official string library then
people would use that and have fewer bugs, especially if there were a
little syntactic sugar.

	int array q;