strcpy_safe is a template function, not a macro. That immediately makes it orders of magnitude better than you were claiming. I agree that a standard fix for t

strcpy_safe is a template function, not a macro. That immediately makes it orders of magnitude better than you were claiming. I agree that a standard fix for this would be great. It's been five years since I wrote the post, the solution has been available for many years longer than that, and the standards committee has shown no interest in fixing this issue. In the interim I think it would be irresponsible for developers to continue using strncpy or any of the other unsafe options when strcpy_safe is so simple and effective.