Re: compat/unsafe.h

Henrik Nordström wrote:
> lör 2010-08-21 klockan 20:07 +1200 skrev Amos Jeffries:
>
>> IMO some of them such as the malloc/calloc/free which only force a
>> xfoo() version internal to Squid to be hard-coded should be done with a
>> real symbol swap-in in the relevant header files. That way the code can
>> go to using malloc/calloc/free and our custom wrappers plug-in silently
>> to src/ code where appropriate.
>
> Not entirely sure what you mean. If you mean that free() should silently
> redirect to xfree() in src/ then I disagree. The two have slightly
> different usage.

Hmm, okay. Whatever our disagreement of that. We agree on removing the
"free_UNSAFE" macros for memory handlers.

>
>> Others like sprintf which are still actually enforcing non-use of unsafe
>> functions should stay.
>
> Many compilers and most auditing tools barfs on sprintf etc these days.
> Not sure why gcc do not..

With gcc being our main compiler this is just another reason supporting
my view on that. These real-unsafe functions are no-harm in detecting
ourselves either way. Easier and better to do at build with someones
eyes-on than later in a sourcemaintenance.sh detection hack-up.

Amos

-- 
Please be using
   Current Stable Squid 2.7.STABLE9 or 3.1.6
   Beta testers wanted for 3.2.0.1