Date: Wed, 25 Jul 2012 11:19:09 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 9/10] GLIBC ABI patches On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 04:12:59PM +0200, Luca Barbato wrote: > On 07/23/2012 03:38 AM, Isaac Dunham wrote: > > +weak_alias(poll, __poll); > > > +weak_alias(fscanf, __isoc99_fscanf); > > > +weak_alias(sscanf, __isoc99_sscanf); > > > -char *strndup(const char *s, size_t n) > > +char *__strndup(const char *s, size_t n) > > > +weak_alias(__strndup, strndup); > > Why strndup is different? I think the idea is that we might want to use __strndup internally in functions which can't expose the strndup name. However, as we haven't yet had a need for that, I suspect it's unlikely. Also, __strndup isn't really an ugly name (it makes sense as the "internal" name for strndup if such usage were needed), but __isoc99_scanf is a huge WTF unless you know the reason it exists in glibc (and then it just makes you hate glibc even more...). With that said, for now I'd probably prefer to keep plain strndup as the "real" name. Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.