No...am I incorrect, especially on OpenBSD? Of course since you made such a remark, you seem like the kind of fellow that would put the nail in the coffin for spite.
...now I sound like an asshole. On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 4:00 PM Theo de Raadt <dera...@openbsd.org> wrote: > hey luke you know you sound like an asshole right? > > > Luke Small <lukensm...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > If you’re not running a threaded program, my function wouldn’t be “less > > safe.” > > > > I’d imagine that 99% of programs aren’t multithreaded. > > > > On Mon, May 16, 2022 at 1:01 PM <k...@sdf.org> wrote: > > > > > > There is the specifically non-threadsafe call getchar_unlocked() on > > > OpenBSD > > > > which is presumably available for performance reasons alone, when > > > getchar() > > > > is a perfectly viable option and is even an ISO conforming function. > > > What I > > > > submitted could be such a higher performance non-threadsafe function. > > > > > > > > so, how about arc4random_uniform_unlocked() ?! > > > > > > getchar_unlocked is mandated by POSIX. > > > > > > OpenBSD has not yet invented an alternate function that only exists to > > > give away safety for performance. It has only gone in the opposite > > > direction if anything. > > > > > > -- > > -Luke >
