🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <808736493snz@wbriscoe.demon.co.uk>,
walter briscoe  <walter@wbriscoe.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <danpop.808655822@rscernix> Dan.Pop@mail.cern.ch "Dan Pop" writes:
>>>    cc .... -Dgets=DONT_USE_GETS
>> Whether you include <stdio.h> or not is irrelevant.  gets() is in the
>> implementation namespace, and any attempt to redefine it invokes undefined
>> behaviour, whether <stdio.h> is included or not:
> I have difficulty with any defence of gets because it allows a program
> to have undefined behavior at run time in consequence of an input.  I
> think that is a standards issue and, in a perfect world, would argue
> that gets should be removed from the standard library.  Given that, I
> appreciate any suggestion which assists me to avoid use of this
> abomination in my own code and to excise it from code for which I take
> responsibility.

You have missed the point. The Standard does not allow you to hide
gets in this way, as Dan points out.

I agree that gets ought to be removed from the Standard, but that is a
different issue.

-- 
Clive D.W. Feather                       | If you lie to the compiler,
clive@demon.net        (work, preferred) | it will get its revenge.
clive@stdc.demon.co.uk (home)            |   - Henry Spencer