Making memcpy(NULL, NULL, 0) well-defined

Viewed 234
The discussion revolves around the proposal to make the behavior of `memcpy` with null pointers well-defined in C programming, specifically aimed at the scenario `memcpy(NULL, NULL, 0)`. Previous standards had this as undefined behavior, which raised concerns and challenges in static analysis and code safety. Various comments reflect on the implications of this change, particularly how it could affect static analyzers, as well as the design philosophy regarding undefined behaviors in library functions. Some believe that making this change could lead to more robust supports while others argue that it may hinder the detection of issues by static analyzers. There's also an emphasis on the need for clear semantic definitions in standard libraries to prevent ambiguous behaviors and potential bugs arising from mismanagement of null pointers and zero-length operations.
0 Answers