Difference between revisions of "Talk:Libcrypto API"
Line 35: | Line 35: | ||
--[[User:Ppelleti|Ppelleti]] 18:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC) | --[[User:Ppelleti|Ppelleti]] 18:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC) | ||
+ | |||
+ | Either way does the trick, but I agree yours is simpler. I'll change it., | ||
+ | |||
+ | --[[User:Matt|Matt]] 22:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 22:16, 3 March 2013
Initialization and engines?
Should the recommended initialization code include a call to ENGINE_load_builtin_engines? (Or to OPENSSL_config, which calls ENGINE_load_builtin_engines.) Otherwise, the RdRand engine for getting better random numbers from newer Intel chips (as one example) won't be used.
(My own thoughts on OpenSSL initialization are here.)
--Ppelleti 18:05, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Hmmm - I've not come across this as a recommendation before. What is the original source for your recommendation?
--Matt 22:15, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Best practices for printing errors
I'm curious about the recommendation to do this:
err: unsigned long errCode; while(errCode = ERR_get_error()) { char *err = ERR_error_string(errCode, NULL); printf("%s\n", err); }
Wouldn't it be much simpler to just do:
err: ERR_print_errors_fp(stderr);
Or, if one really does want to iterate through each line of the error queue individually, wouldn't it still be better for us to recommend using ERR_error_string_n with an explicit buffer? ERR_error_string with a NULL argument is not thread-safe.
--Ppelleti 18:12, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
Either way does the trick, but I agree yours is simpler. I'll change it.,
--Matt 22:16, 3 March 2013 (UTC)