Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 17:33:22 -0500 From: Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> To: Dmitrij Tejblum <tejblum@arc.hq.cti.ru> Cc: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: stpcpy() Message-ID: <19991030173322.A472@holly.calldei.com> In-Reply-To: <199910302228.CAA03773@tejblum.pp.ru> References: <19991029151317.E535@holly.calldei.com> <199910302228.CAA03773@tejblum.pp.ru>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, Oct 31, 1999, Dmitrij Tejblum wrote: > I don't care about Linux compatibility. stpcpy() is an useful > function, even if only little useful. There is no more reason to call > it bloat than for asprintf(), or strsignal(), or even fts(), or strvis() > or strlcpy(). GNU getopt has nothing to do with stpcpy() and cannot be > a valid argument to not include stpcpy() in libc. I wasn't associating GNU getopt with stpcpy. asprintf is very useful, I see nothing wrong with FTS (because it serves a large purpose), I'm not sure whether I like strsignal/strvis or not. And I was and still am against strlcpy. I don't think there should be any more bloat only to serve the purpose of compatibility with a bunch of Linux programs which use stpcpy(). (Regardless of whether stpcpy is a Linuxism or not, it's mostly a Linux thing now.) -- |Chris Costello <chris@calldei.com> |I modem, but they grew back. `---------------------------------- 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?19991030173322.A472>