User: Password:
|
|
Subscribe / Log in / New account

The ups and downs of strlcpy()

The ups and downs of strlcpy()

Posted Jul 20, 2012 12:59 UTC (Fri) by nix (subscriber, #2304)
In reply to: The ups and downs of strlcpy() by etienne
Parent article: The ups and downs of strlcpy()

And replace three to eight bytes strings with arrays of eight bytes pointers?
No. I'd expect such an abstraction to return a struct (for information-hiding purposes) which has one member, an offset into the string table. No pointers needed.
Places where you need non-standard memory allocation (fail if allocation would sleep, allocate as virtual or physical memory, fail if allocation obviously too big at 10 Mbytes for a string, force a stack allocation) may not be so rare.
To a first approximation these are all things that are only going to happen in kernel coding. If you're writing kernel code I expect you to be smart enough to use the language you're writing in, or at the very least to have appropriate abstractions that can be told things like 'do not allocate now' (and indeed the kernel's various internal abstractions can be told just this).

However, most people are not kernel programmers, and don't operate under such harsh constraints. For them, there's no excuse to not use appropriate abstractions other than a pointlessly minimalist C coding style more appropriate for the tiny systems of the 1970s than for now.


(Log in to post comments)


Copyright © 2017, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds