On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 1:08 AM, Fulko Hew <fulko.hew@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I know the definition for memcpy (on Linux) says don't use overlapping > regions but thats really a poor excuse for knowingly misbehaving when > it could certainly prevented. Sorry, but using 'optimization' as a defense > is just plain poor engineering practices. > > Its certainly easier to provide a single well-behaved memcpy than it is to > ensure that ALL programmers in the world write software that prevents > overlapping regions. > > It may just be me, but wouldn't it be 'common sense'? The understood and expected to be safe command to use is memmove when overlapping memory regions may be an issue. For programmers who don't want to concern themselves with the additional work necessary to make use of more optimized codepaths cleanly..should be using memmove and taking the performance hit instead of relying on memcpy.. -jef"uses memmove on the code he writes that has to run on both qnx and linux"spaleta -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
