Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader01.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Idle: C library features wish-list. Date: Sat, 19 Nov 2022 06:54:25 -0800 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 38 Message-ID: <86a64nc7vi.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <86y1txinka.fsf@linuxsc.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: reader01.eternal-september.org; posting-host="3a600a3efa6b1d635770a4955b3f9787"; logging-data="3411329"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+wN/ra1FN2ZJXRd9gKKPKpHLcW4BPqW7E=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:k1EnkhkKdZmrTBx8+kkHEFuVNNU= sha1:NTdBmqmhsMOJofyELIjzilc6f1w= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:168282 BGB writes: > On 10/2/2022 10:38 PM, Tim Rentsch wrote: > >> BGB writes: >> >>> There are some things that come up often that it might be "useful" if >>> they could be supported in a more portable ways. >>> >>> [ ... ] >>> >>> Any thoughts?... >> >> None of these is suitable for inclusion in the ISO C standard. > > Possibly. Definitely. > This is stuff that comes up a lot, and almost every non-trivial > program needs to implement a lot of this itself [...] No, it doesn't. Some programs do. Certainly it is not the case that almost every non-trivial program does. > Like, say, for example, what if the C library had not provided > "memcpy()" and similar, [...] There are obvious differences between memcpy() and the interfaces you describe. Those differences explain why memcpy() should be included in the C standard library, and the described interfaces should not. > [...] Your thoughts are rather scattered. If you want to make a serious suggestion, you should focus on exactly what it is you want to suggest, and talk about that, and nothing else.