Plans for deprecation

  • Thread starter david.dynamicconcepts
  • Start date
D

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?????
 
R

red floyd

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++?
 
V

Victor Bazarov

red said:
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
 
R

red floyd

Victor said:
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++.
 
I

Ian Collins

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.
 
H

Herhor

Ian Collins pisze:
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?=

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).
 
J

James Kanze

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.
 
I

Ian Collins

James said:
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 :)
 
J

Jerry Coffin

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.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
473,744
Messages
2,569,482
Members
44,901
Latest member
Noble71S45

Latest Threads

Top