> On Fri, Dec 13, 2002 at 03:26:34PM -0500, Matthew Hagerty wrote: >> Is the MemMove function actually relocating the bytes, or just making a >> copy? The documentation does not specify this, and to me a *move* means >> you are dealing with and moving only one set of data. > > Sure, the MemMove() documentation is terrible -- but then there were so > many non-trivial functions to document, it's not surprising they didn't > spend much time on this one, which has an "obvious" standard counterpart. >
I disagree. Assumptions will make a fool of you every time. The Palm is a completely proprietary system (hardware and software), and being such they could do things anyway they want. If the MemMove functions is a wrapper to the C counter part, then they should have documented it that way, since we are all C programmers here. Also, Palm is a commercial business for which you have to pay for access to the hardware and software, and being such I expect great documentation and superior support (from Palm.) After all, what are we paying for? If this was open source, then fine, I could accept sloppy docs (but I would have a chance to correct them too), but not from commercial systems that I have to cough up money for. I'm sure there are plenty of people in the Palm community, I being one of them, who would gladly contribute to such things as better documentation, since Palm does not have time for such "trivial" functions (according to your comments above.) I'm sorry for the sarcastic tone, but this just hits a nerve. > After last time this came up (two months ago -- I'm sure your archive > search was useful) I understand improving this one is either on the > documentation team's list or already done. > I didn't do an archive search, and for that I apologize to everyone on the list for wasting their time and bandwidth. I usually do extensive searching before posting, I just got ahead of myself this time. But, until the documentation is corrected, this question will continue to be asked, you can count on that! And I'll be glad to answer it next time. >> Basically what I'm asking is can I treat this like the standard C >> memcpy() >> function? > > Treat it like the similar standard C memmove() function. Hence the > name. There was probably an expectation that this was "obvious", but > every couple of months someone arrives for whom it clearly is not. > Therefore that expectation was wrong. > > John > Moving and copying are not the same. I don't see what is so obvious. Just because it is named the same as a function in the standard C library? Then why didn't they just use the man page entry for memmove(), since it is clear and concise, would have been faster (cut and paste), and tells you that you are making a *copy*. Should I go by what the name is or what the descriptions says that function does? The MemMove Purpose says: "Move a range of memory to another range in the dynamic heap." I wonder if they could be any more vague? I'll step off my soapbox now. Thank you everyone for the information, and especially you John, for giving me a chance to have a good down-home argument! :-) Matthew -- For information on using the Palm Developer Forums, or to unsubscribe, please see http://www.palmos.com/dev/support/forums/
