2

2/5/2009 12:18:00 AM

<font size=7>memcpy</font>

2/5/2009 12:19:38 AM

Quote :

"i think we can all agree that java is the worst abomination of a programming language ever known to man. amirite?"

actually java owns lately

2/5/2009 12:20:39 AM

the shitter, maybe

2/5/2009 12:22:00 AM

no

but seriously though tiberius owning the living shit out of scud's bitch ass in this very thread

2/5/2009 12:23:04 AM

what the fuck about memcpy evan?

2/5/2009 12:23:13 AM

An amusing article about some bad (both intentionally and unintentionally) programming languages:

http://www.softwaredeveloper.com/features/ghosts-in-machine-071207/

2/5/2009 12:23:56 AM

Unlambda has to be my favorite intentionally painful programming language

http://www.madore.org/~david/programs/unlambda/

[Edited on February 5, 2009 at 12:26 AM. Reason : .]

2/5/2009 12:26:28 AM

evan's point is that a careful programmer would initialize his pointer so that the char* would be guaranteed to be null terminated (given that he didn't overflow the allocated space by accident).

It's not even worth responding to since it's not in any way/shape/form enforced.

2/5/2009 12:27:35 AM

http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/bf/

2/5/2009 12:27:47 AM

oh

memset?

[Edited on February 5, 2009 at 12:30 AM. Reason : .]

2/5/2009 12:29:56 AM

^^^^My favorite intentionally painful one is probably Malbolge:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malbolge

[Edited on February 5, 2009 at 12:30 AM. Reason : ]

2/5/2009 12:30:07 AM

I didn't realize the linux source was the standard for proper coding.

2/5/2009 12:30:23 AM

Quote :

"It's not even worth responding to since it's not in any way/shape/form enforced."

sad, but true.

but honestly, if someone doesn't know to do this, they have no business writing in c.

2/5/2009 12:31:18 AM

yep

it's all 100% state-of-the-art up to date awesome awesome code

2/5/2009 12:31:34 AM

Quote :

"I didn't realize the linux source was the standard for proper coding."

the kernel source is where programmers go to die

2/5/2009 12:32:23 AM

by all means, pick your favorite source base and retort

2/5/2009 12:33:51 AM

template <typename Foo> void copyFoo( std::forward_iterator<Foo> b, std::forward_iterator<Foo>, std::insert_iterator<Foo> ii) {
  while (b!=e) *ii++ = *b++;
}

std::string src("this sucks");
std;:string dst;
copyFoo( src.begin(), src.end(), std::back_inserter(dst) );

2/5/2009 12:43:20 AM

COUT << LOLZ

I'm Big Business and i approved this message.

2/5/2009 12:44:05 AM

templates are awesome, and there are certain compile-time tricks you can achieve with templates that are practically impossible in any other notation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template_metaprogramming

however you may note that the entire C-style implementation is shorter than the templated prototype. the C-style implementation also requires no includes, while you have omitted your stl includes. one might go so far as to say STL is STL, and not C++ at all. I would argue that null-terminated array copy of a known type is not the right time and place for templates.

2/5/2009 12:54:08 AM