[C-safe-secure-studygroup] Criteria for freely available ISO/IEC JTC 1 standards

[Robert Seacord]

I don't think this group can consider attributes for 17961, because it's
out of scope.  If you recall the conversation yesterday, the study group
decided to focus on C11.  As attributes are being proposed for C2X, I think
they are out of scope for this study group.

I think some ideas may come out of this study group, as Aaron suggests, for
proposals to WG14.  In general, this study group is (and has already) going
to complain a lot about the C language, but we're not going to try to fix
it (that's what WG14) does.  The study group's focus is to decide when
analyzers and compilers should warn the programmer that they are doing
something unsafe or insecure (in their C11 code).

rCs

On Thu, Jan 5, 2017 at 12:20 PM, Aaron Ballman via C-safe-secure-studygroup
<c-safe-secure-studygroup at lists.trustable.io> wrote:

>
>
> It is my hope that this group does consider attributes. I've put forth
> a proposal for a generalized syntax in N2049, as well as several
> proposals for concrete attributes, which were favorably considered in
> Pittsburgh. I will have follow up papers for Markham. My hope is that
> C gains a standardized mechanism for annotating source constructs, and
> that this group can make recommendations on how best to apply those
> attributes to the standard library, as well as any additional
> attributes we think may be appropriate to recommend.
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.trustable.io/pipermail/c-safe-secure-studygroup/attachments/20170105/73d12a35/attachment.html>