> Date: 2026-08-03 01:41:39+0200 > From: Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]> > > > Date: 2026-08-03 01:37:30+0200 > > From: Alejandro Colomar <[email protected]> > > > > Hi Collin, > > > > > Date: 2026-08-02 16:27:21-0700 > > > From: Collin Funk <[email protected]> > > > > > [...] > > > > > > I can't help but wonder of what happens in WG 14 rejects this > > > controversial, as obvious by this thread, change. Will the man-pages > > > changes be reverted? > > > > Or will we slowly watch them document personal > > > preferences instead of existing standards? > > BTW, as I showed in another subthread, strncpy(3) did contain > opinionated comments well before I was involved. If you're really > going to accuse me of that, better make sure you get the history right.
Oh, and while at it, please also read my review of glibc's own opinionated and bogus documentation about string truncation. Cheers, Alex > > > Cheers, > Alex > > > > > This patch set is quite independent of the standard. It documents a > > header file that has been provided since forever in glibc and most other > > POSIX-ish systems, so changes to the standard are unlikely to have any > > effects. I've clarified this extensively. If you want to discourage me > > from applying the change, you should rather bring up technical reasons. > > > > This passive-aggressive message is not something that will have the > > desired effects you could possibly reach with technical arguments. > > > > > > Have a lovely night, please! > > Alex > > > > > After seeing weekly threads > > > about the prototype changes, I don't think it is an unreasonable > > > concern. > > > > > > Collin > > > > > > > -- > > <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es> > > > > -- > <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es> -- <https://www.alejandro-colomar.es>
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
