Ashwin Agrawal <[email protected]> writes:
> On Wed, Mar 13, 2019 at 9:51 AM Tom Lane <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I don't think that's a safe transformation: what strlcpy returns is
>> strlen(src), which might be different from what it was actually
>> able to fit into the destination.
>> Sure, they're equivalent if no truncation occurred; but if we were
>> 100.00% sure of no truncation, we'd likely not bother with strlcpy.
> So, if return value < length (3rd argument) we should be able to use the
> return value and avoid the strlen, else do the strlen ?
Mmm ... if there's a way to do it that's not messy and typo-prone,
maybe. But I'm dubious that the potential gain is worth complicating
the code. The strings involved aren't usually all that long.
regards, tom lane
