From: Martin Str|mberg <ams AT ludd DOT luth DOT se>
Message-Id: <200301102322.h0ANMfu27001@brother.ludd.luth.se>
Subject: Re: strlcat, strlcpy, revision 2 [PATCH]
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Date: Sat, 11 Jan 2003 00:22:41 +0100 (MET)
In-Reply-To: <4634-Fri10Jan2003223842+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> from "Eli Zaretskii" at Jan 10, 2003 10:38:43 PM
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.5 PL2]
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

According to Eli Zaretskii:
> > From: "Richard Dawe" <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
> > + If @var{dest} and @var{src} are overlapping buffers, the behavior
> > + is undefined.
> 
> What does this mean, exactly?  The specific implementation we have is
> deterministic, right?  So it is possible to tell exactly what does it

Probably. I think he's talkning about C standard undefined behaviour.

> do when the buffers overlap, right?  If so, I think we should describe
> the actual behavior of our implementation.

That's a good idea. But might not say much ("if they do, your code
might do anything; at least one of the effects being writing over
memory way out of bounds").


Right,

						MartinS