This is the mail archive of the mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Wish for 2002 ...

Felix von Leitner <> writes:

> > 1) These functions exist in BSD libc, which used to be a sufficient
> >    argument all by itself for why they should in glibc.
> > 2) These functions are in growing use by many programs.
> What, bcopy?  In growing use?

No, strlcpy is in growing use.  Or can't you keep track of the
argument well enough to know which function is which?

> > So, to summarize:
> > 1) We should not add these functions because it will make glibc a tiny
> >    bit slower. (Linus)
> > 2) We should not add these functions because we don't really care
> >    about tiny improvements in speed. (Kaz)
> > Can you pick a single story and keep it straight?
> Thomas, we have perfectly good arguments.
> You don't have to invent new ones which look easier to ridicule or
> refute.

Huh?  What's the argument?  The two immediately quoted above have in
fact been raised, and they are directly contradictory to each other.

Now you've raised another, which is that somehow adding a function
that many people already use will actually *decrease* portability.
That's a new one, but it's also false.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]