strcpy与strncpy的区别

211人阅读 评论(0)

Edit: I've added the source for the example.

I came across this example:

char source[MAX] = "123456789";
char source1[MAX] = "123456789";
char destination[MAX] = "abcdefg";
char destination1[MAX] = "abcdefg";
char *return_string;
int index = 5;

/* This is how strcpy works */
printf("destination is originally = '%s'\n", destination);
return_string = strcpy(destination, source);
printf("after strcpy, dest becomes '%s'\n\n", destination);

/* This is how strncpy works */
printf( "destination1 is originally = '%s'\n", destination1 );
return_string = strncpy( destination1, source1, index );
printf( "After strncpy, destination1 becomes '%s'\n", destination1 );

Which produced this output:

destination is originally = 'abcdefg'
After strcpy, destination becomes '123456789'

destination1 is originally = 'abcdefg'
After strncpy, destination1 becomes '12345fg'


Which makes me wonder why anyone would want this effect. It looks like it would be confusing. This program makes me think you could basically copy over someone's name (eg. Tom Brokaw) with Tom Bro763.

What are the advantages of using strncpy() over strcpy()?

strncpy combats buffer overflow by requiring you to put a length in itstrcpy depends on a trailing \0, which may not always occur.

Secondly, why you chose to only copy 5 characters on 7 character string is beyond me, but it's producing expected behavior. It's only copying over the first n characters, where n is the third argument.

The n functions are all used as defensive coding against buffer overflows. Please use them in lieu of older functions, such as strcpy.

0
0

* 以上用户言论只代表其个人观点，不代表CSDN网站的观点或立场
个人资料
• 访问：206585次
• 积分：5403
• 等级：
• 排名：第5323名
• 原创：312篇
• 转载：238篇
• 译文：2篇
• 评论：12条
评论排行
最新评论