https://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=38549
Tim Turner <timturnerc at yahoo dot com> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC| |timturnerc at yahoo dot com
--- Comment #8 from Tim Turner <timturnerc at yahoo dot com> ---
"The strncat() function shall append not more than n bytes (a null byte and
bytes that follow it are not appended) from the array pointed to by s2 to the
end of the string pointed to by s1." http://www-look-4.com/category/technology/
The wording imply that the third "n" argument is an additional boundary limit,
not the destination buffer capacity (ie. the destination buffer is not
implicitly SIZE_MAX), https://komiya-dental.com/health/healthy-foods/ and both
source and destination do not overlap (overlapping depends on the source and
destination layout, not on the "n" value)
http://www.iu-bloomington.com/computers/invisible-with-vpn/
However, it seems that the optimized strncat version of the GLIBC behaves
incorrectly, when using this value. https://waytowhatsnext.com/sports/navona/
"The strncat() function shall append not more than n bytes (a null byte and
bytes that follow it are not appended) from the array pointed to by s2 to the
end of the string pointed to by s1."
https://www.webb-dev.co.uk/sports/sports-and-health/
The wording imply that the third "n" argument is an additional boundary limit,
not the destination buffer capacity (ie. the destination buffer is not
implicitly SIZE_MAX), and both source and destination
http://www.wearelondonmade.com/category/tech/ do not overlap (overlapping
depends on the source and destination layout, not on the "n" value)
However, it seems that the optimized strncat version of the GLIBC behaves
incorrectly, when using this value.
http://www.jopspeech.com/category/technology/
"The strncat() function shall append not more than n bytes (a null byte and
bytes that follow it are not appended) from the array pointed to by s2 to the
end of the string pointed to by s1."
http://joerg.li/category/technology/
The wording imply that the third "n" argument is an additional boundary limit,
not the destination buffer capacity (ie. the destination buffer is not
implicitly SIZE_MAX), and both source and destination do not
http://connstr.net/category/technology/ overlap (overlapping depends on the
source and destination layout, not on the "n" value)
However, it seems that the optimized strncat version of the GLIBC behaves
incorrectly, when using this value.
http://embermanchester.uk/category/technology/
"The strncat() function shall append not more than n bytes (a null byte and
bytes that follow it are not appended) from the array pointed to by s2 to the
end of the string pointed to by s1."
http://www.slipstone.co.uk/category/technology/
The wording imply that the third "n" argument is an additional boundary limit,
not the destination buffer capacity (ie. the destination buffer is not
implicitly SIZE_MAX), and both source and destination do not overlap
http://www.logoarts.co.uk/category/technology/ (overlapping depends on the
source and destination layout, not on the "n" value)
However, it seems that the optimized strncat version of the GLIBC behaves
incorrectly, when using this value.
http://www.acpirateradio.co.uk/category/technology/
"The strncat() function shall append not more than n bytes (a null byte and
bytes that follow it are not appended) from the array pointed to by s2 to the
end of the string pointed to by s1."
http://www.compilatori.com/category/technology/
The wording imply that the third "n" argument is an additional boundary limit,
not the destination buffer capacity (ie. the destination buffer is not
implicitly SIZE_MAX), and both source and destination do not overlap
(overlapping depends on the source and destination layout, not on the "n"
value)
However, it seems that the optimized strncat version of the GLIBC behaves
incorrectly, when using this value.
