This is the mail archive of the
gcc-patches@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
Re: GCJ manual changed
- From: Tom Tromey <tromey at redhat dot com>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <jsm28 at cam dot ac dot uk>
- Cc: Per Bothner <per at bothner dot com>, Nic Ferrier <nferrier at tapsellferrier dot co dot uk>, <java-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>, <gcc-patches at gcc dot gnu dot org>
- Date: 30 Jan 2002 11:59:07 -0700
- Subject: Re: GCJ manual changed
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.33.0201301749380.2081-100000@kern.srcf.societies.cam.ac.uk>
- Reply-to: tromey at redhat dot com
>>>>> "Joseph" == Joseph S Myers <jsm28@cam.ac.uk> writes:
Joseph> In that case, the manual should state that references to UTF-8
Joseph> are to the Java dialect meaning rather than the standard
Joseph> Unicode meaning.
Or we could introduce our own term. Overloading the meaning of
"UTF-8" was an unfortunate decision of the JVMS authors.
Joseph> Does Java define that, except for the special encoding of the
Joseph> null byte, over-long sequences must be treated as invalid, to
Joseph> avoid the usual security holes associated with them?
I don't recall seeing text to that effect in anything I've read. And
I'd be willing to bet that at least some versions of the JDK from Sun
don't reject such sequences. For that matter, we don't reject such
sequences. It's unclear whether we should change our implementation
here; this is yet another under-specified aspect of Java.
Tom