Re: [9fans] lpdaemon

[Don Bailey <don.bailey@gmail.com>]

You get that I'm talking about the subsequent read back after copy, right? No need to be so competitive :)

Also, you're making strange presumptions about me having presumptions. I'm not trying to say you're wrong or a poor coder, Erik. I was simply offering my point of view.

Before this thread dissolves into typical Plan 9 waste I'll admit that my first mistake was to make the poor decision to reply to a 9fans email. 

D

On Jun 5, 2013, at 8:09 AM, erik quanstrom <quanstro@quanstro.net> wrote:

>> You're absolutely correct if the length of value to be copied is not
>> validated prior to the copy.  Then, an invalid page could be hit if no
>> nil is present within the array or beyond.
> 
> wrong.  strncpy only copies up to the specified maximum.
> the code is ugly but correct.
> 
>> To be verbose, my bypassing of strncpy is due to issues I've
>> encountered in multi-threaded code.  e.g.  Don't trust libc copy
>> functions in MT envs, always check post call.
> 
> this sounds like your saying that because you had trouble in
> a multithreaded unix application, then without examining the
> code at hand, it is pronounced to have the same issue.
> 
> that sounds like equivocation to me.  the code is correct.
> and in all cases nul-terminated, and any unused bytes are
> 0.
> 
> i only object to strncpy because it requires extra work. seprint,
> snprint are a bit heavy weight but tend to produce cleaner looking
> code.  ymmv.
> 
> - erik
>