On Sun, Mar 21, 2004 at 11:45:18PM -0500, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > Karel, do you plan to use pstrndup for some purpose?  I assume so.

 I   think    PostgreSQL   should   supports   basic    operation   with
 allocation/strings if  it's open for  users' C functions and  we expect
 our own memory system usage.

> I am not familiar with strndup.  If the spec is like strncpy, I would
> vote against including it ... strncpy is so broken that we had to invent
> our own variant ...

 POSIX strncpy()  is different,  a result from  strncpy needn't  be zero
 terminated. You're right it's horrible function.
 The result of  strndup() is always zero terminated. It's  more safe and
 strndup() is  binary safe because  it doesn't check something  in input
 string. The pstrndup() is based on PostgreSQL memory managment.



---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 8: explain analyze is your friend

Reply via email to