Re: Replace remaining StrNCpy() by strlcpy()

Peter Eisentraut <peter(dot)eisentraut(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> writes:
> I removed namecpy() altogether because you can just use struct assignment.

Makes sense, and I notice it was unused anyway.

v3 passes eyeball examination (I didn't bother running tests), with
only one remaining nit: the proposed commit message says

They are equivalent,

which per this thread is incorrect. Somebody might possibly refer to this
commit for guidance in updating third-party code, so I don't think we want
to leave a misleading claim here. Perhaps something like

They are equivalent, except that StrNCpy zero-fills the entire
destination buffer instead of providing just one trailing zero.
For all but a tiny number of callers, that's just overhead rather
than being desirable.

regards, tom lane