Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!burl!codas!mtune!rutgers!ucla-cs!cit-vax!tim
From: tim@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu (Timothy L. Kay)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: bug in Turbo C 1.5
Message-ID: <5331@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu>
Date: 27 Jan 88 02:33:48 GMT
Reply-To: tim@cit-vax.UUCP (Timothy L. Kay)
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Lines: 22

>... ("error" in mem_copy)
>
>Please read your Readme file...

I'd like to thank all the people who explained to me that the change
in memcpy was noted in the readme file that came with the disks.  Somehow
I had missed this eventhough I had read the readme file.

I'd like to make two points.  First, why was it necessary for Borland
to *change* memcpy to conform to the standard?  It seems to me that the
old version of memcpy already conformed to the standard.  In changing
memcpy, they only caused people like me inconvenience.  (Please don't
suggest that some people want to use memcpy to clear memory.)

The second point is this.  After I posted my (not-a-)bug report, I received
several notes via mail that pointed out my error.  Then, six days later,
I am still seeing postings that tell me the same thing.  I think
followups are an inappropriate way to answer such questions.  In the
future, if there are questions such as mine, please mail the answer.  The
original poster should then summarize.

Tim