[Cryptography] GnuTLS -- time to look at the diff.
Harald Koch
chk at pobox.com
Fri Mar 7 13:49:01 EST 2014
On 7 March 2014 12:22, Nico Williams <nico at cryptonector.com> wrote:
> Goto isn't the problem.
>
>
Anyone hung up on goto should learn that you can write the same code with:
do {
if (something fails) {
break;
}
...
} while (false);
/* cleanup code goes here */
This has no goto, but it has exactly the same failure modes as the
goto-laden code (btw, if you're looking for a "goto cleanup;" equivalent in
Java, this is how you do it).
I believe the real issue here remains that writing *and testing* security
code is hard. And re-implementing an essential security library for license
purity is, bluntly, foolish.
--
Harald
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.metzdowd.com/pipermail/cryptography/attachments/20140307/bfb69598/attachment.html>
More information about the cryptography
mailing list