Re: Using the return value of strlcpy() and strlcat()
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Using the return value of strlcpy() and strlcat() |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 32001.1552528633@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Using the return value of strlcpy() and strlcat() (Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal@pivotal.io>) |
Ответы |
Re: Using the return value of strlcpy() and strlcat()
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Ashwin Agrawal <aagrawal@pivotal.io> writes: > On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 9:51 AM Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >> I don't think that's a safe transformation: what strlcpy returns is >> strlen(src), which might be different from what it was actually >> able to fit into the destination. >> Sure, they're equivalent if no truncation occurred; but if we were >> 100.00% sure of no truncation, we'd likely not bother with strlcpy. > So, if return value < length (3rd argument) we should be able to use the > return value and avoid the strlen, else do the strlen ? Mmm ... if there's a way to do it that's not messy and typo-prone, maybe. But I'm dubious that the potential gain is worth complicating the code. The strings involved aren't usually all that long. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: