Re: strlen on a NULL

[Fergus Henderson <fjh at cs dot mu dot OZ dot AU>]

On 13-May-1998, Michael Hirmke <mh@mike.franken.de> wrote:
> Valery Fine [fine@bnl.gov] wrote:
> 
> >On 12 May 98 at 13:42, Kjeld.F.Christensen@dxd.erics wrote:
> >
> >> On NT your process may lie anywhere, but never in ZERO, Thus you are
> >> not permitted to read from adress NULL. (You are not allowed to
> >> snoop around in the interrupt vetors!)
> >
> >  Some int strlen(char *s) is started with
> >
> >  int strlen(char *s){
> >   if (s==0) return 0;
>                      ^
>                      *This is really incorrect behaviour* !

No, the behaviour in this case is UNDEFINED -- that means that
ANY behaviour is correct behaviour.

Of course, strlen() should be

	size_t strlen(const char *s)

not

	int strlen(char *s)

-- 
Fergus Henderson <fjh@cs.mu.oz.au>  |  "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh>  |  of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger fjh@128.250.37.3        |     -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
-
For help on using this list (especially unsubscribing), send a message to
"gnu-win32-request@cygnus.com" with one line of text: "help".