Prev: USB stick rescue (no MBR no Partition) "Code 10"
Next: a.out and ELF file formats
From: Ersek, Laszlo on 28 Feb 2010 19:31
In article <KyKnJF.x4(a)nfm.marshlabs.gaertner.de>, neitzel(a)marshlabs.gaertner.de (Martin Neitzel) writes:
> Mark Hobley wrote:
>> Strangely, there is a string.h and a strings.h
>
> Historically (in the eighties), BSD systems had the declarations
> for string functions such as strcpy() in <strings.h> whereas SystemV
> systems had them in <string.h>. There were some differences in
> return types (int vs. char*) and naming (index() vs. strchr()).
>
> These differences were always a portability nuisance. Later,
> ANSI C (1989) came and also defined the standard library.
> This made <string.h> the norm. In today's systems, you'll
> often find a <strings.h> which just #includes <string.h>.

SUSv3 (POSIX:2004) and SUSv4 (POSIX:2008) have a <strings.h> which is
not an empty shell:

http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/000095399/basedefs/strings.h.html
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/basedefs/strings.h.html

Cheers,
lacos
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2 3
Prev: USB stick rescue (no MBR no Partition) "Code 10"
Next: a.out and ELF file formats