OpenEuphoria

Re: Blowfish.e (Alexander Toresson)

• Posted by irv mullins <irvm at ellijay.com> Jul 04, 2004
• 519 views

Alexander Toresson wrote:
> 
> They are not necessary. They are there for a feature of the library to 
> work. All they do is catch all the output/input from/to a program and
> optionally encrypt the output and decrypt the input. 
>     They're there to make a program use encryption/decryption very easily,
> without big rewrites of code.
>     Maybe I should consider removing that feature because it seems to 
> cause trouble. Could you describe your case?
>     For now, if they cause trouble, remove them and just accumulate output
> into a buffer and then encrypt it.

Thanks. My program uses gets() to read files, does some work, 
and then saves the results. (Which I want to encrypt before saving)

But the calls to gets() now go to the function in blowfish.e, which just 
returns an error - even though I have included your file as:

include blowfish.e as bf

Now, this isn't really your fault, it's more the fault of Euphoria for not 
letting us assign namespaces to its own built-in commands, but as it 
stands, there's no way for me to access the Eu version of gets() without 
re-writing some of your blowfish.e code. Same may apply to other overridden 
functions, such as printf(), etc. (I haven't tried them yet).

Now, I know that I can rename the functions in blowfish.e to eliminate 
this problem, but the point is, I shouldn't have to do that. Especially 
since you may update that library, and then I would have to do it all over 
again. Plus, sharing my program with anyone else would be problematical, 
because they might not have my hacked version of your library - or my 
hacked version would overwrite your unhacked version which they might be 
depending upon for some other application.

I would really prefer that you leave your library as is, 
and let Rob fix the problem (hint, hint).

Regards,
Irv