There's an awful lot of pitfalls and footguns in there.
There are indeed a lot of pitfalls and footguns in C in general but I would argue that has more to do with c's memory focused design. I always feel like C strings are a bit of an afterthought but it does confirm well with the C design. Perhaps it is more so a syntax issue where the memory handling of strings is quite abstracted and not very clear to the programmer.
Disclaimer: I am not the author of the comment, and honestly I am more than happy if OpenBSD broke %n in printf because it looks awful from a security standpoint.
> you mean that it is hard to write secure code with C strings.
Indeed I do :) It is possible to write a "secure" hello world program in C; the point is that both the language and the standard library make it exceedingly easy to slip in attack vectors when you deal with strings in any serious capacity.
The C11 printf_s functions don't support it at all, so it's clearly already on the naughty list even from the standard's perspective.
gnabgib•4w ago