On 08/11/14 13:43, Rickard Strandqvist wrote:
> 2014-08-07 8:43 GMT+02:00 Randy Dunlap :
>> On 08/06/14 11:16, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>>> Using strncpy() will just silently truncate long strings; we should
>>> instead return an appropriate error. Using strlcpy() would suffer from
>>> the same proble
2014-08-07 8:43 GMT+02:00 Randy Dunlap :
> On 08/06/14 11:16, Chris Metcalf wrote:
>> Using strncpy() will just silently truncate long strings; we should
>> instead return an appropriate error. Using strlcpy() would suffer from
>> the same problem. Instead, use strnlen()+memcpy(), and add an
>> e
On 8/7/2014 2:43 AM, Randy Dunlap wrote:
On 08/06/14 11:16, Chris Metcalf wrote:
Using strncpy() will just silently truncate long strings; we should
instead return an appropriate error. Using strlcpy() would suffer from
the same problem. Instead, use strnlen()+memcpy(), and add an
error-checki
On 08/06/14 11:16, Chris Metcalf wrote:
> Using strncpy() will just silently truncate long strings; we should
> instead return an appropriate error. Using strlcpy() would suffer from
> the same problem. Instead, use strnlen()+memcpy(), and add an
> error-checking step to make sure the lengths are
2014-08-06 20:16 GMT+02:00 Chris Metcalf :
> Using strncpy() will just silently truncate long strings; we should
> instead return an appropriate error. Using strlcpy() would suffer from
> the same problem. Instead, use strnlen()+memcpy(), and add an
> error-checking step to make sure the lengths
Using strncpy() will just silently truncate long strings; we should
instead return an appropriate error. Using strlcpy() would suffer from
the same problem. Instead, use strnlen()+memcpy(), and add an
error-checking step to make sure the lengths are reasonable.
I called the convenience wrapper s
6 matches
Mail list logo
