Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!snorkelwacker!bloom-beacon!eru!luth!sunic!draken!d88-jwa
From: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon Watte)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: String Copy in THINK C 4.0
Message-ID: <2834@draken.nada.kth.se>
Date: 4 Feb 90 18:15:33 GMT
References: <2083@quiche.cs.mcgill.ca> <2826@draken.nada.kth.se> <34105@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte)
Organization: Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Lines: 16

In article <34105@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> oster@dewey.soe.berkeley.edu.UUCP (David Phillip Oster) writes:
>In article <2826@draken.nada.kth.se> d88-jwa@nada.kth.se (Jon W{tte) writes:
>>memmove(p2, p1, *p1 + 1); /* copies pascal string p1 to p2 */
>		^ This is NOT the right way to get the length of a pascal

This is, of course, the right and _efficient_ way to do _this_ operation.
It doesn'n fail, given two legal pascal strings. I suppose I could even
prove it, strongly.

Of course, the rest of the article is right about _that_ special case,
but that doesn't happen in this case.

h+
-- 
   ---  Stay alert !  -  Trust no one !  -  Keep your laser handy !  ---
             h+@nada.kth.se  ==  h+@proxxi.se  ==  Jon Watte
                    longer .sig available on request