Plans for deprecation

[david.dynamicconcepts]

Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

[red floyd]

da*******************@gmail.com wrote:

Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

I didn't realize that Microsoft had that kind of power. I thought only
the Standards committee could officially deprecate str* functions.

As for the rest of your question, may I suggest you check comp.std.c++?

[Victor Bazarov]

red floyd wrote:

da*******************@gmail.com wrote:

>Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

I didn't realize that Microsoft had that kind of power. I thought
only the Standards committee could officially deprecate str*
functions.
As for the rest of your question, may I suggest you check
comp.std.c++?

Since those are C functions, checking 'comp.std.C' might be
a marginally better idea. Just a thought...

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

[red floyd]

Victor Bazarov wrote:

red floyd wrote:

>da*******************@gmail.com wrote:

>>Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

I didn't realize that Microsoft had that kind of power. I thought
only the Standards committee could officially deprecate str*
functions.
As for the rest of your question, may I suggest you check
comp.std.c++?

Since those are C functions, checking 'comp.std.C' might be
a marginally better idea. Just a thought...

Yes, but they're still in C99, as well as C89, and since they're
included in the C++98 Standard (and 03 revision) I was thinking that OP
was wondering about C++0x, since he did post on c.l.c++.

[Ian Collins]

da*******************@gmail.com wrote:

Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

All part of M$ apparent attempts to dumb down programming languages. A
bit insulting to developers in my opinion.

--
Ian Collins.

[Herhor]

Ian Collins pisze:

da*******************@gmail.com wrote:

>Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

All part of M$ apparently attempts to dumb down programming languages. A
bit insulting to developers in my opinion.

Good idea, M$!

Present programing languages are too hard! Thus Windows programming must
be as simple as Windows handling and because M$ has almost absolute
monopoly on PC OS market, Bill can change standards himself without ask
anybody for permission!

[=?iso-8859-1?q?Erik_Wikstr=F6m?=]

On 1 Maj, 17:08, [e-mail] wrote:

Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

Perhaps you should mention that with deprecation MS means that they
have added warnings in the documentation and made the compiler emit a
warning if the functions are used (along with instructions of how to
disable the warnings).

--
Erik Wikström

[James Kanze]

On May 2, 12:10 am, Ian Collins <[e-mail]:

[e-mail] wrote:

Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

All part of M$ apparent attempts to dumb down programming languages. A
bit insulting to developers in my opinion.

Then you should take it up with the C committee. The "safe"
replacements for the C functions are part of a TR developed by
the C standardization committee. (The use of the word
"deprecated" in the warning is a poor choice by Microsoft. The
functions haven't been "deprecated", and probably never will be.
But the C committee was apparently convinced that they did need
safer replacements.)

Seems like some people don't like the effects of buffer
overflows, etc.

--
James Kanze (GABI Software) email:ja*********@gmail.com
Conseils en informatique orientée objet/
Beratung in objektorientierter Datenverarbeitung
9 place Sémard, 78210 St.-Cyr-l'École, France, [phone]

[Ian Collins]

James Kanze wrote:

On May 2, 12:10 am, Ian Collins <[e-mail]:

>[e-mail] wrote:

>>Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

>All part of M$ apparent attempts to dumb down programming languages. A
bit insulting to developers in my opinion.

Then you should take it up with the C committee. The "safe"
replacements for the C functions are part of a TR developed by
the C standardization committee. (The use of the word
"deprecated" in the warning is a poor choice by Microsoft. The
functions haven't been "deprecated", and probably never will be.
But the C committee was apparently convinced that they did need
safer replacements.)

Seems like some people don't like the effects of buffer
overflows, etc.

If you want to see where this debate leads, read the current thread
"gets() is dead" over on c.l.c :)
--
Ian Collins.

[Jerry Coffin]

In article <11**********************@u30g2000hsc.googlegroups .com>,
da*******************@gmail.com says...

Now that Microsoft has deprecated many of the str.???(...) functions,
and an increasing number of development shops and Business Software
Development Groups are trying to eliminate these routines (which are
easily subject to mis-use). What if any is the intention of the
standards commitee for new releasesw of the standard?????

From the viewpoint of C++, they're not exactly deprecated (not
officially anyway) but except under rather unusual circumstances, you're
generally better off using std::string instead.

--
Later,
Jerry.

The universe is a figment of its own imagination.