Re: Proposed submissions for the revision from The Open Group

[Paul Eggert <yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Garrett Wollman wrote:

> Why these and not strlcpy()/strlcat() from OpenBSD, which seem to
> have a wide following and actually has improved semantics over the
> functions on which they are based?

This topic came up before, in the thread rooted here:

http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag/msg08066.html

You can see some objections to strlcpy and similar primitives here:

http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag/msg08079.html

I particularly liked Ulrich Drepper's take, here:

http://www.opengroup.org/austin/mailarchives/ag/msg08120.html


API Set 1 doesn't include asprintf and vasprintf; is their omission
intensional?  They are not as general and flexible as open_memstream,
but they are handy.