More on strcpy()

[00704a-Liber]

In article <904 at mit-caf.UUCP> vlcek at mit-caf.UUCP (Jim Vlcek) writes:
>Why not define strcpy() such that the destination is guaranteed to be
>equivalent to the original (before the move) source string?  While
>this *suggests* an implementation, it does not out-and-out *specify*
>it, yet it still seems to me to provide the behavior desired.

One problem with this method is that the length of the source string must
be known *first* in order to get the copy completely right.  This is not as
efficient as the way strcpy() is usually defined; ie,
'while (*dst++ = *src++);', because two passes are required over the src
string (one to find the length and one to perform the copy).

The other problem I have with this definition, as well as with the proposal
that strcpy() be defined as having the same result as the 'while' loop I
stated above, is that strcpy() can LEGALLY be used to modify the *src*
string.  It is this property becoming legal that I object to.
-- 
 _ __			NEVIN J. LIBER	..!ihnp4!ihlpf!nevin1	(312) 510-6194
' )  )				"The secret compartment of my ring I fill
 /  / _ , __o  ____		 with an Underdog super-energy pill."
/  (_</_\/ <__/ / <_	These are solely MY opinions, not AT&T's, blah blah blah