> On 4 Dec 2022, at 23:06, Sam James via Libc-alpha <libc-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> On 4 Dec 2022, at 20:42, Alejandro Colomar via Libc-alpha <libc-alpha@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >> >> Hi Helge, glibc developers, >> >> On 12/4/22 10:07, Helge Kreutzmann wrote: >>> Without further ado, the following was found: >>> Issue: Is the "L" in the bracket (for the NULL character) correct? >>> "The B<wcsncpy>() function is the wide-character equivalent of the" >>> "B<strncpy>(3) function. It copies at most I<n> wide characters from the" >>> "wide-character string pointed to by I<src>, including the terminating null" >>> "wide character (L\\(aq\\e0\\(aq), to the array pointed to by I<dest>." >>> "Exactly I<n> wide characters are written at I<dest>. If the length" >>> "I<wcslen(src)> is smaller than I<n>, the remaining wide characters in the" >>> "array pointed to by I<dest> are filled with null wide characters. If the" >>> "length I<wcslen(src)> is greater than or equal to I<n>, the string pointed" >>> "to by I<dest> will not be terminated by a null wide character." >> >> As an unrelated note. I've had this running in my mind for some time... your various bug reports for strncpy(3) and similar wide character functions have triggered those thougts. >> >> I'm going to mark strncpy(3) and similar functions as deprecated, even if no libc or standard has done so. There's wide agreement (at least in some communities) that strncpy(3) _is evil_. There's simply no use for it. >> > > Please don't do this unilaterally. Apple did this unilaterally for sprintf which has caused problems, as well. snprintf, that is
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP
