DM> I don't feel comfortable being in the company of 
DM> bad programmers no matter what their products.
 RS>  I find the whole finger pointing "Bad Programmer" business to be very
 RS>  counter productive.   No matter how highly Gaines thinks of himself,
 RS>  I'm sure he doesn't have all areas of the art mastered to the point
 RS>  where all of his code is %100 bug free.
However, I'm fairly certain Gaines has few, if any, bugs that are related to 
corrupt string memory.
Programming to get "100% bug free" is merely the art of not writing bugs, or, 
rather, catching any bugs you do write.  Don't cover them up - fix them.  In 
this case, Gaines is more likely to catch his bugs than those who use the 
memset kludge.
 RS>  I intend to check out the code in question and also to pay more
 RS>  attention to this issue in the future.  OTOH, I will never be so
 RS>  close minded as to consider a programmer who uses memset to clear
 RS>  a string a "Bad Programmer" based on that one thing.
Nor, I think, does Gaines consider someone who uses the memset kludge a "Bad 
Programmer(tm)" but merely a coder who uses this Bad kludge.  This is merely 
something that you would have in common with the "Bad Programmer(tm)"... 
sorta like a serious version of calling you a "hockey player" if you can ice 
skate.  One thing in common - but continuing on the same track will lead you 
to the same destination.
 RS>  Calm down?  If I calm down any more I'll be dead.   IMO, he started
 RS>  it with the "Good Programmer, Bad Programmer" crap.
If he actually called you a name, he should calm down (I apologize - I musta 
missed him calling YOU a Bad Programmer), too.  However, categorizing the Bad 
Programmer(tm) will help people avoid becoming a Bad Programmer.  IMO, even 
those who never want to code for a living should be happy to know what to 
avoid - their hobby is much easier if they do it RIGHT.  Debugging is the 
LEAST fun of a programmer's duties, whether s/he be a hobbiest or a 
professional.
 RS>  And I intend to heed the warning...  OTOH, I learned long ago that
 RS>  blanket generalizations usually tend to have holes in them.
Perhaps that blanket generalization (about blanket generalizations) has a 
hole in it... ;-)
---
---------------