On Mon, 8 Mar 1999, Josh MacDonald wrote:
> Overall, I think it is safer to use an unsigned character representation,
> and use casts to (char*) when neccesary. Since the library does lots of
> manipulations on things that are sometimes strings, but mostly to be
> treated as binary data, this makes sense. There are few good reasons to
> treat characters as signed, except for the system libraries, and there are
> good reasons to keep things unsigned. A common programming mistake is to
For example when the program is manipulating foreign character sets...
It's allowed in certificates, if the name entries are encoded into T61
strings.
Ralf already knows it, of course... ;-)
--
Erwann ABALEA
System and Development Engineer - Certplus SA
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
- RSA PGP Key ID: 0x2D0EABD5 -
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
