> Proper and careful use of dynamic string libraries is in any case > better than fixed-size buffers; they solve the security problem (with > overflows) and they do not inhibit functionality, as do fixed-size > buffers. These are my thoughts also. Static buffers suck. I supose there is always the danger of intrducing more bugs due to the relative complexity of such a dynamic scheme however. Currently I use a library of functions which implement a quasi-OO based implementation of dynamic strings with a future addition of a shared string table. Since these functions are in a library and get hammered on daily, they have become relatively bug free and quite reliable. I don't see a lot of reason to use any static buffers. I more careful examination of performance degradation might show such dynamicism unwieldy in some applications, but that is the give and take present in any OO based system, no? Anyone have any thoughts, insites, or experiences? MikeB