On Thu, Aug 18, 2022 at 6:08 PM Kees Cook <keescook@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Please, no UB. I will take a panic over UB any day. It'd be best to > handle things with some error path, but those are the rare exception. > > C is riddled with UB and it's just terrible. Let's make sure we don't > continue that mistake. :) I definitely agree on avoiding UB :) > The simple answer is that if an "impossible" situation can be recovered > from, it should error instead of panic. As long as that's the explicit > design goal, I think we're good. Yes there will be cases where it is > really and truly unrecoverable, but those will be rare and can be well > documented. Yeah, that is the goal and we always take that into account, but there are always tricky cases which is best to consider case-by-case. Cheers, Miguel
