Re: memcpy/memmove
From: Christopher Benson-Manica (ataru_at_nospam.cyberspace.org)
Date: 11/12/03
- Next message: John Bode: "Re: A couple of questions re. the function prototype"
- Previous message: Tom St Denis: "Re: unsigned long long"
- In reply to: Simon Biber: "Re: memcpy/memmove"
- Next in thread: Irrwahn Grausewitz: "Re: memcpy/memmove"
- Reply: Irrwahn Grausewitz: "Re: memcpy/memmove"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2003 15:27:16 +0000 (UTC)
Simon Biber <news@ralminnospam.cc> spoke thus:
> All six have undefined behaviour: both pointers must be valid
> pointers even if the number of characters to copy is zero.
> C99 7.21.1#2 (trimmed)
Thank you. Now, if only K&R2, my other C book, or my friendly man page had
said as much...
-- Christopher Benson-Manica | I *should* know what I'm talking about - if I ataru(at)cyberspace.org | don't, I need to know. Flames welcome.
- Next message: John Bode: "Re: A couple of questions re. the function prototype"
- Previous message: Tom St Denis: "Re: unsigned long long"
- In reply to: Simon Biber: "Re: memcpy/memmove"
- Next in thread: Irrwahn Grausewitz: "Re: memcpy/memmove"
- Reply: Irrwahn Grausewitz: "Re: memcpy/memmove"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|