nethack | NetHack ; the best game

So we got an assignment in uni to format a text. The max width of a line shoud be 68 characters and if the words dont fill the line we have to fill the empty spaces with blanks, equally distributed between far left and far right.

The Problem is when i build and run the programm it crashes but when im debugging it, it runs fine.

My Compiler is Codeblocks 17.12 and to debugg im using minGW gdb. Im pretty new to programming and know that my code is probalby not the greatest. We got the function readtext from our professor.

I have 2 CSV files (each of them have more than 1000 lines) like below:

urls.csv

I'm working on a project that involves developing a game similar to nethack, I have to write it only in C (for now anyway). The idea is that I need to create rooms that are made up of periods ('.'). These rooms need to be placed randomly in the terminal, which I have a grid (basically the dungeon). I've written some code, so hopefully you'll be more encouraged to help me with my problem. The code is posted below and I'll explain it in detail and my problem below it.

I'm working in a NetHack clone that is supposed to be playing through Telnet, like many NetHack servers. As I've said, this is a clone, so it's being written from scratch, on Python.

I've set up my socket server reusing code from a SMTP server I wrote a while ago and all of suddenly my attention jumped to this particular line of code:

I am trying to publish my project on bintray for the first time. I read the documentation here

https://github.com/sbt/sbt-bintray

My plugins.sbt file is

So, it's been just over eleven years since a Debian maintainer infamously caused RNG seeds to become predictable by commenting out a usage of uninitialized data.

The issue generated a lot of heated discussion in online circles, with most of the focus seemingly being on criticizing the review process or attacking the developers in question.

However, I haven't been able to find any information on the actual thought process behind the segment being there in the first place. A lot of users argue that "worst case, it can't hurt" - however, that seems utterly counter-intuitive to me.

After all, reading from uninitialized memory invokes undefined behavior which, infamously, can cause nasal demons, run nethack or format your hard drive. Thus, it seems to me that introducing this sort of logic into any program - let alone a crypto library - puts you one aggressive compiler optimization away from utter disaster.

Thus, my question(s):

• Am I misunderstanding something? Is there a reason why this is actually not invoking UB, but well-defined under the standard?
• If it does in fact invoke UB, why was this behavior originally included in OpenSSL?