tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4348519741358344123.post1449354116374994309..comments2015-03-05T06:36:11.192-05:00Comments on functional orbitz: Deconstructing Zed's K&R2 DeconstructionUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4348519741358344123.post-926043869695000072015-01-27T04:51:34.544-05:002015-01-27T04:51:34.544-05:00I enjoyed reading this and viewing the selection o...I enjoyed reading this and viewing the selection of featured sites. Thanks for taking the time to put it all together. I enjoyed reading this and viewing the selection of featured sites. Thanks for taking the time to put it all together.<a href="http://www.mageewp.com" rel="nofollow">free wordpress themes</a> <br /><a href="http://www.mageewp.com" rel="nofollow">blog Wordpress themes</a> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03219097156050087206noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4348519741358344123.post-57746882885789521362014-05-03T11:02:28.754-04:002014-05-03T11:02:28.754-04:00Dear Zed.
In your article I note that you say &qu...Dear Zed.<br /><br />In your article I note that you say "The only way to solve it is to include the length of every string and use that to scan it."<br /><br />Wouldn't another solution be to use that length to put a '\0' at string[length]? Doesn't that mean your solution isn't the only one?<br /><br />Wa la. Problem solved. No more strlen problems. You lose. Who's your farkin' daddeh? I am! Next...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17957549709535511477noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4348519741358344123.post-26716489136579471472013-01-25T04:25:48.365-05:002013-01-25T04:25:48.365-05:00Your first point is correct, I never actually come...Your first point is correct, I never actually come down on if I think the K&R2 function is the correct solution or not.<br /><br />Your second point is false though. Your function is not guaranteed to terminate. If you give invalid lengths to safercopy, specifically larger than the strings, it is not guaranteed to terminate. The behaviour is undefined. So your analysis of your own solution is incorrect.orbitzhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15829306324556605767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4348519741358344123.post-36887612073098969932013-01-24T18:19:38.340-05:002013-01-24T18:19:38.340-05:00Your argument is flawed in two ways:
1. You canno...Your argument is flawed in two ways:<br /><br />1. You cannot say that K&R's string copy function is correct because you believe my function is wrong. All that does is show mine's flawed, not disprove that theirs is flawed.<br /><br />2. I actually point out this problem with sizes, but no matter what size you give it *my function does terminate*. Pick any size integer you want, it is still finite on every machine. Meanwhile, the while-loop version does not terminate, and provably so. That is the defect, and failure to terminate logically is a flaw.<br /><br />So no, your critique of mine is nothing more than repeating what I already said, then claiming it disproves that K&R's function is broken but not actually presenting a formal proof that revalidates their function.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00769382854387732028noreply@blogger.com