On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 12:20:09AM +0200, Marc Espie wrote: > On Tue, Jun 22, 2010 at 06:53:12PM +0000, Miod Vallat wrote: > > > >> Is there any reson you use bcopy() not memcpy()? > > > >> If not considder using memcpy() please. :) > > > > > > > We couldn't care what you believe, unless you have diffs of your own > > > > to submit. > > > > > > I think the guy there asked if there is any difference, it was just that. > > > I > > > also don't know bcopy() and would like to know just out of curiosity (I'm > > > really don't know, isn't not an irony): there's some difference between > > > bcopy() and memcpy()? > > > > Yes, the order of the arguments. bcopy is intuitive: since you copy FROM > > somewhere TO somewhere, the arguments are FROM, TO, LENGTH. memcpy has > > FROM and TO exchanged, which is stupid. Some people argue this is > > because it is similar to an assignment, where you write DEST = SRC. But > > function calls are hardly assignments in my book. > > Err. shame on strcpy on being dest, src ?
Totally. > Why don't you compaign to have miodstrlcpy( ) ? I'll switch tomorrow! miod is 100% right. memcpy is another committee hit job on practicality. OMG bcopy wasn't invented here lets flip around the parameters foar moar bettar!!!!one!!!```~!~!Y~%!^%
