Subject: RE: ANSI standards
From: James Montgomerie (jamie@montgomerie.net)
Date: Sun Jan 23 2000 - 17:42:51 CST
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rui Silva - Webmaster [mailto:rms@ssi.aaum.pt]
> Sent: 23 January 2000 23:57
> To: James Montgomerie
> Subject: Re: ANSI standards
>
>
> If it's feasible, I suggest verifying the size first, than use strncmp.
> it might avoid a core dump later, I dunno.
The size of what? Does strcmp have a maximum size of string it can take?
As far as I know we're not actually creating anything new here (I don't see
why a string comparison should require us to). Perhaps you're confusing
strcmp with [the non-ANSI] strdup?
> > > > Does anyone know the reason we're implemening strcmp(...) as an
> > > intermediate
> > > > function, UT_strcmp(...), and putting the code in the
> > > platform-specific cpp
> > > > files (strcmp(...) /is/ ANSI)?
> > > >
> > > > I'm planning to take out the platform-specific versions and
> > > simply #define
> > > > UT_strcmp(x, y) to strcmp(x, y) if no-one can think of a
> reason why I
> > > > shouldn't.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Sun Jan 23 2000 - 17:40:08 CST