Date: Mon, 1 Nov 1999 20:04:04 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: obrien@freebsd.org Cc: tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: stpcpy() Message-ID: <199911012004.NAA00280@usr02.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <19991031225429.A10904@dragon.nuxi.com> from "David O'Brien" at Oct 31, 99 10:54:29 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> On Sun, Oct 31, 1999 at 02:28:54AM +0400, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > > > First it's stpcpy, then GNU getopt, then ... > > > > Yes. So what? You are suffering from the "NIH" disease. (BTW, stpcpy is > > not first and is not GNUism/Linuxism). > > Then where did it come from? Borland Turbo-C, and thereafter it was quickly adopted by Microsoft, as both compiler companies raced to make their libraries supersets of the others libraries, so they could make the argument that their competitors compiler couldn't compile "standard" Windows source code. Contrary to popular opinion, it certainly was not a function in the libraries of "Wizard C", "Aztec C", "Lattice C", "Oregon C", "VAX C", or the majority of compilers that did not also have Windows versions. I also don't rememebr it on any of the 140+ UNIX platforms I've compiled code on in the last 20 years, with the exception of Linux (and I didn't inhale while using Linux). Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-arch" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199911012004.NAA00280>