Re: [Passwordsafe-devel] SecString class

[Jim R. <ji...@ru...>]

> --- James Curran <Ja...@No...> wrote:
> > 	I've just join in, and figure that I'd throw in my two cent on
> > the recent conversations:

Welcome, James.  Nice to have you.

> --- Edward Elliott
> That's what we're here for :).  Thanks for taking time to contribute.
> I haven't heard from Jim in months, I don't think he's actively
> working on the project anymore.  Not that I've done anything either...

Now, Edward, I'm still here.  Swamped as hell, but I'm still here.  
I've just started a new full-time job, while still trying to finish 
off the contracting job I had to pay the bills until I *got* the 
full-time job, and I still managed to get the v1.90 beta posted on 
sourceforge, didn't I?

As I mentioned the *first* time the SecString discussion came up, 
don't forget that that particular scrap of code is *not* part of 
the current build of Password Safe.  It was just me making notes 
to myself as to what we might do to get rid of CMyString, which we 
want to get rid of because it's a subclass of CString, and we're 
never gonna port this thing to other platforms unless we wean it 
away from MFC.

> > this, you just have to look at the one (inconceivable) scenario,
> > where it is a problem:
> 
> It appears such a scenario is conceivable, given that you conceived of
> one :).

"I do not think that word means what you think that word means."  [Inego Montoya]


> All in all, I think an allocator is the safest way to go.  That still
> lets us use all the STL algorithms on SecString, which should be more
> than sufficient for PasswordSafe's needs.

When Edward and I last discussed this, James, I was leaning in the 
same direction (the allocator).  At that time, he promised me that 
he would write one.  <g>

Jim R
The Phantom Maintainer