On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 06:09:36PM +0100, Richard Henderson wrote: > On 2013-04-25 14:38, Laszlo Ersek wrote: > >><strings.h> is the K&R header supplanted by ISO <string.h>. > >>Is there any good reason that we're including it at all? > > > >- <strings.h> is a portable SUS/POSIX header: > > > >http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/strings.h.html > > Huh. Ok, fine, but what do we think we're using out of it that > isn't in <string.h>?
Ok, I can fix the namespace issue (which is real) easily. But this still leaves two questions open: - why not use an unsigned return value for your homegrown version? - would it be preferable to use official/optimized versions if available? Thanks, Martin
