Thanks for that. I suppose that wrappering memcpy as as strncpy is not a good idea. To save confusion, would a comment in unicode.h to say "don't worry strncpyW is missing by design and that memcpy/lstrcpynA/W should be used instead" be a good precaution?
Jeff Latimer
James Hawkins wrote:
On 4/25/05, Jeff Latimer jeffl@defcen.gov.au wrote:
I have just been reading the lists and realise that strncpyW/strncpy is bad news for some reason. Please consider this patch withdrawn.
Wouldn't it be better to implement strncpyW as a wrapper for memcpy? Given that all the other string functions are implemeted with the (W) version, having strncpyW missing is a bit confusing.
Quoted from winehq.org Janitorial Page:
"strncpy(dst,src,n) has two subtle problems. The first is that it always fills the whole dst buffer (n characters). The second is that it doesn't always nul terminate the dst buffer that it's filling. Wine code should avoid the use of strncpy for these reasons, and instead use lstrcpynA/W or memcpy."