lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Sat, 10 Aug 2013 16:49:18 -0400
From: Daniel Franke <>
Subject: Re: [PHC] C99 in reference implementations

On Aug 10, 2013 3:01 PM, "Rich Felker" <> wrote:

> Personally, I think the fact that C99 is nearly 15 years old and not
> even the current version of the standard anymore is sufficient
> justification to say "C" means a language which includes all C99
> features (except perhaps those which C11 made optional).

I just checked, and VLAs are in this category.  I think that's sufficient
justification for avoiding them. Barring any contrary recommendations from
panel members, I think I'll nix those but hold on to the rest.

Content of type "text/html" skipped

Powered by blists - more mailing lists