> It is not impossible to maintain a code base that uses up to 32 char long > function names - without losing the readability of the code. > I agree that it requires some extra focus from the developers side - but > coding a security software needs that (and even more) focus anyway.
Yes, but symbol names are a distraction from the main focus of security. Many of the >32 char names are auto-generated via #define's an ASN1 parsing. Most of the others follow common convention used elsewhere in the code. Consistency is more important than support for old platforms :) _______________________________________________ openssl-dev mailing list To unsubscribe: https://mta.openssl.org/mailman/listinfo/openssl-dev
