Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!att-ih!pacbell!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!bbn!rochester!PT.CS.CMU.EDU!andrew.cmu.edu!jv0l+
From: jv0l+@andrew.cmu.edu (Justin Chris Vallon)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: strcpy wars, jeez! A proposed resolution.
Message-ID: <AWJKL5y00UjH5fM0-k@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: 2 Apr 88 22:05:57 GMT
Organization: Carnegie Mellon University
Lines: 11
In-Reply-To: <3267@haddock.ISC.COM>

>"... implementation defined."

Means NON-PORTABLE!  If implementation X does it one way [ie strcpy(s, s+1)
works], and implementation Y does it another way [ie strcpy(s, s+1) does not
work], my program will behave very differently on different systems, but both
strcpy() functions adhere to the ANSI specs.

I cannot expect an ANSI standard which isn't a standard.  Isn't non-portable
code something that ANSI is trying to prevent, not endorse?

-Justin