Open FrankHB opened 3 years ago
This is probably fixed by #3065.
Nothing passes _Nocreate
so we should remove it in vNext and investigate the other questions here.
@FrankHB
Perhaps _Noreplace
was broken before but it's probably fixed by #3065 by using C11 "x"
mode in fopen
(with the addition of C++23 noreplace
), unless UCRT's fopen
is broken.
Per the following line: https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/be81252ed1f5e5fc6d77faca0b5dbbbdae8143a2/stl/src/fiopen.cpp#L64
I believe MSVC STL's ios_base::_Nocreate
is not only implying ios_base::in
, but also equivalent to it. So it doesn't mean any non-standardized "traditional meaning".
@StephanTLavavej
As we removed ios_base::hexfloat
before (#4345), I think we can remove _Nocreate
from <xiosbase>
before vNext. Although we may need to preserve the related logic in fiopen.cpp
for ABI compatibility.
The implementation strategy in https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/main/stl/src/fiopen.cpp is quite unnatrual, which leaves to problems for non-standard flags, even the expect behaviors are not well-documented.
What does
ios_base::_Nocreate
exactly mean?By https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/cc515bbb42dbbfba184527ad2e7c093a78c10442/stl/src/fiopen.cpp#L52,
ios_base::_Nocreate
impliesios_base::in
. But what happens for a write-only mode, i.e.ios_base::out
orios_base::app
? Is it the tradition meaning of "nocreate" in this case?TOCTTOU issue on handling
io_base::_Noreplace
This one seems a real bug. Between https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/cc515bbb42dbbfba184527ad2e7c093a78c10442/stl/src/fiopen.cpp#L71 and https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/cc515bbb42dbbfba184527ad2e7c093a78c10442/stl/src/fiopen.cpp#L80, if a file named by
filename
is created, the check is voided, so the flag is useless in this case. It looks like the same to the infamous anti-pattern of multiple calls to POSIXopen
to make sure the exclusive open-and-create semantics. The idiomatic correct way is usingO_CREAT | O_EXCL
in a single call, to enforce the atomicity.Related implementation question
The concerned functions are implemented by the stdio extension function
_fsopen
. Why not use lowio (i.e._wsopen
) instead? This can easily resolve the correctness problems mentioned above, and it could be a bit more efficient due to the simpler mode translation and parsing (in the underlying implementation; once you have the implementation-specific knowledge, it seems not difficult to bypass the redundant passing like__acrt_stdio_parse_mode
in_wfdopen
) even if an object referenced byFILE*
is still needed to be created later.If lowio is not an appropriate choice for some coding policies I don't know, is it considerable to use C11-style "x" modes in https://github.com/microsoft/STL/blob/cc515bbb42dbbfba184527ad2e7c093a78c10442/stl/src/fiopen.cpp#L14?