Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!att-ih!pacbell!ames!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!gatech!uflorida!codas!ki4pv!tanner
From: tanner@ki4pv.uucp (Dr. T. Andrews)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: noalias, again (was extern const)
Summary: more on "noalias" for strcpy() and friends; boring
Message-ID: <7007@ki4pv.uucp>
Date: 2 Apr 88 16:56:42 GMT
References: <7712@apple.Apple.Com> <7485@brl-smoke.ARPA> <10731@mimsy.UUCP> <7553@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Organization: CompuData, DeLand
Lines: 23

In article <7553@brl-smoke.ARPA>, gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn ) writes:
) Your (Chris's) example does not illustrate this, but merely reflects
) your misunderstanding of what is guaranteed by existing practice.
It seems to be a common  mis-understanding.   So  far,  even  the
writers of run-time libraries have suffered from it.

The real net  effect  of  the  X3J11  "improvement"  of  strcpy()
definitions  is  likely  to be that folks need to write their own
version in order to be sure that something useful is done.

A hundred programmers, each dreaming up his own name for strcpy()
instead  of  using  the routine that worked so well pre-X3J11, do
not seem to be aiding the cause of standardization.

) >DMR, where are you when we need you?
) He's working with X3J11 committee members to help get the intended
) functionality correctly specified in the final ANSI C standard.
I'd like to know whose intentions are specified in this "noalias"
functionality.   Seems  like the original routine did the "right"
thing, working for those fine people  wishing  to  shorten  their
strings.
-- 
{allegra clyde!codas decvax!ucf-cs ihnp4!codas killer}!ki4pv!tanner