Message129945
| Author |
vstinner |
| Recipients |
amaury.forgeotdarc, belopolsky, eric.smith, vstinner, ysj.ray |
| Date |
2011年03月03日.09:31:09 |
| SpamBayes Score |
1.5341808e-08 |
| Marked as misclassified |
No |
| Message-id |
<1299144670.05.0.140938015947.issue10833@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
History of PyErr_Format():
- r7580 (13 years ago): creation of PyErr_Format() using a buffer of 500 bytes (fixed size buffer, allocated on the stack)
- r17159 (10 years ago): PyErr_Format() allocates a dynamic buffer on the heap
- r22722 (9 years ago): PyErr_Format() reuses PyString_FromFormatV() (dynamic buffer, allocated on the heap)
belopolsky>> Limiting field width when formatting error messages
belopolsky>> is a good safety measure.
me> Can you give me at least one example? I think that it is very
me> unlikely, or just impossible.
Python allocates a dynamic buffer since r17159 (10 years ago), and the strings were *never* truncated just because %.100s format was never supported (it is interpreted as %s).
If you still consider that %.100s protects is a good solution against crashes: you have to realize that Python doesn't truncate strings since 10 years, and nobody complained.
--
The situation is changing because Ray Allen wrote a patch implementing %.100s: #7330. I would like to decide what to do with %.100s in error messages before commiting #7330.
--
Eric and Alexander: do you still consider that %.100s is important in error messages? Or do you know agree that we can replace them with %s? |
|