[PATCH 1/2] man/man3/{mem, strn}*(): SYNOPSIS, STANDARDS: Document these as provided by <memory.h>
Joseph Myers
josmyers@redhat.com
Fri Jul 31 23:28:19 GMT 2026
On Fri, 31 Jul 2026, G. Branden Robinson wrote:
> Occasionally, matters get relitigated because they had been wrongly
> decided. I appreciate the trend since 2000 or so of Stroustrup (with
That's a plausible description of Alejandro's attempt to relitigate
realloc with size 0, in order to reduce UB. (Although in that case I
think there have simply been too many changes, and so the semantics are
irremediably confused regardless of any subsequent standard changes, and
the best solution would involve a new function with a different name.)
I don't think it's a reasonable description for what are essentially
stylistic matters, for anything as widely used as the header in which
memcpy is declared or the NULL macro. That's in "would have spelt creat
with an e" territory - things that could have been better with hindsight
but where the cost outweighs any possible benefit at this stage in the
language's life. "Avoiding UB" or "real user confusion" (in the case of
strn*) are much better arguments than "slightly unaesthetic classification
of functions into headers".
And I consider it an abuse of position to change man-pages to declare to
users in general of C libraries on GNU/Linux that your standards proposal,
at a very early stage (not even an N-document), is the One True Way of
using the functions. It would be more neutral to say in the man pages
that "as of July 2026, one member of WG14 has proposed moving these
functions to <memory.h> [reference]; this proposal has not yet been
considered by WG14". (I doubt the utility to users of describing proposed
changes in man-pages at such an early stage, especially since the
information would be long obsolete by the time those revisions of the
pages make it into distributions, but it would at least more accurately
reflect reality, and be vaguely neutral as long as you do it for
*everyone's* open proposals, *including those you personally disagree
with*, rather than privileging your own.)
--
Joseph S. Myers
josmyers@redhat.com
More information about the Libc-alpha
mailing list