[TUHS] History of strncpy

Ronald Natalie ron at ronnatalie.com
Thu Jan 24 07:39:47 AEST 2013

It's really in my mind the opposite of C and unix in design.    It's not very consistent.   Why does the FILE
structure go as the first argument in some functions (similar to the way UNIX tends to do things) and at the end of others?
Why on earth did they preserve the silly fread/fwrite size feature that just multiplies the two middle args together long
after it was realized that portability doesn't demand making such a distinction.   Why is there no consistency in
return values?    It's was poorly thought out as the portable I/O library (which apparently never really got ported\
anywhere) and just condified in all it's ugliness.

On Jan 23, 2013, at 12:56 PM, Michael Spacefalcon wrote:

> Ronald Natalie <ron at ronnatalie.com> wrote:
>> I suspect strcpy arrived with the "portable I/O library", an abomination
>> that eventually evolved into the stdio library and to this day is still
>> stinking up the standard C language.
> What's so bad about stdio?  That's a genuine question - I've never had
> a reason to dislike stdio...
> SF
> _______________________________________________
> TUHS mailing list
> TUHS at minnie.tuhs.org
> https://minnie.tuhs.org/mailman/listinfo/tuhs

More information about the TUHS mailing list