I think for new code in environments that support newer standards C89 shouldn't be used. For the increasingly rare places new C is being written where C89 is th

I think for new code in environments that support newer standards C89 shouldn't be used. For the increasingly rare places new C is being written where C89 is the latest tooling available and the code handles strings, a safer string library is nearly a must. I strongly recommend a safer string library no matter which standard, but I'm nobody. When updating existing code C89 (maybe K&R) might be what's used so minor code changes won't undo that. I tend to write most of my code in something higher-level than C and only resort to C or assembly in performance-critical sections as found with a profiler. Plenty of general-purpose languages have memory-safe strings built into the language, and honestly I keep hoping the Cisco/Intel safestrings library or something like SDS gets the standard library blessing one day.