Re: httpd ...

[gudu () winternet com (Michael Bresnahan)]

  > Proper and careful use of dynamic string libraries is in any case
  > better than fixed-size buffers; they solve the security problem (with
  > overflows) and they do not inhibit functionality, as do fixed-size
  > buffers.

These are my thoughts also.  Static buffers suck.  I supose there is
always the danger of intrducing more bugs due to the relative
complexity of such a dynamic scheme however.  Currently I use a
library of functions which implement a quasi-OO based implementation
of dynamic strings with a future addition of a shared string table.
Since these functions are in a library and get hammered on daily, they
have become relatively bug free and quite reliable.  I don't see a lot
of reason to use any static buffers.  I more careful examination of
performance degradation might show such dynamicism unwieldy in some
applications, but that is the give and take present in any OO based
system, no?  Anyone have any thoughts, insites, or experiences?

MikeB