[OT?] Pronunciation of "strcpy"

[Dan Pop]

On 10 Sep 2003, Dan Pop wrote:

[snip]

1. It exceeds the C89 limit of 509 characters in a string literal
(after concatenation).

But it does not exceed the C99 limit of 4095.

This would make it OK in a newsgroup dedicated to C99, like comp.std.c.
Last time I checked, c.l.c was still dealing with *portable* C
programming.

Not necessarily. The basic execution character set is
implementation-defined.

The members of the basic execution character set are fully specified
by the standard, only their encoding is implementation-defined. Since
your program prints an arbitrary set of values, there is no guarantee
that all the values will correspond to members of the basic
execution character set.

Chapter and verse, please?

Undefined behaviour by lack of specification of behaviour.

Dan

 

[Tak-Shing Chan]

On 10 Sep 2003, Dan Pop wrote:

[snip]

1. It exceeds the C89 limit of 509 characters in a string literal
(after concatenation).

But it does not exceed the C99 limit of 4095.

This would make it OK in a newsgroup dedicated to C99, like comp.std.c.

As far as I can tell, comp.std.c is not dedicated to C99
programming at all.

Last time I checked, c.l.c was still dealing with *portable* C
programming.

Last I checked, no one here had agreed on a common
definition of portability yet.

The members of the basic execution character set are fully specified
by the standard,

No, the standard says that the basic execution character
set ``shall have at least the following members''. The ``at
least'' clause means that the set is not fully specified.

only their encoding is implementation-defined. Since
your program prints an arbitrary set of values, there is no guarantee
that all the values will correspond to members of the basic
execution character set.

Irrelevant, because some characters will be ``added,
altered, or deleted'' (7.19.2p2) before output, to conform to the
implementation's execution character set.

Undefined behaviour by lack of specification of behaviour.

No. See 7.19.2p2.

Tak-Shing

 

[Ben Pfaff]

Thanks to the wonders of modern technology, you can hear me say "strcpy". So
can other people, but I can't address everyone by name.

http://www.rjgh.co.uk/me/strcpy.tar.gz (37618 bytes) contains a .wav file of
around 128KB. Insane, since it's only (slightly under) 6 seconds of audio.

I finally got around to downloading and listening to this.
Hilarious. Thanks for brightening my day.

 

[Allin Cottrell]

I finally got around to downloading and listening to this.
Hilarious. Thanks for brightening my day.

Yes, very nice. Those of is who were unsure how Richard could avoid
saying something like "stircpy" will notice that he gets around this
by saying "stricpy" instead!

Allin Cottrell.

 

[Richard Heathfield]

Yes, very nice. Those of is who were unsure how Richard could avoid
saying something like "stircpy" will notice that he gets around this
by saying "stricpy" instead!

It's more like "struhcpy", at least in intent. I don't deliberately
pronounce a vowel at all. I simply drop the "ing" from "string" and
pronounce what's left.