Zed's Twitter killfile must be a mile long if this got me into it: https://gist.github.com/9efed904a1ea0902c7c7/213de692d29fddea1ecf43e1a1bbe50665562097 https:/

Zed's Twitter killfile must be a mile long if this got me into it: https://gist.github.com/9efed904a1ea0902c7c7/213de692d29fddea1ecf43e1a1bbe50665562097 https://gist.github.com/9efed904a1ea0902c7c7/213de692d29fdde... He's right though. This really is a silly argument. Your life will almost certainly be better if you forget strcpy exists. Really, C strings are broken in general. Computing their length is O(n) when it could be O(1), and a missing null terminator results in undefined behavior (a crash if you're lucky). Worse, copying an oversized string into an undersized buffer results in a buffer overflow, which gets you a nice mention here: http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls http://www.kb.cert.org/vuls. strcpy is about as safe as a hand grenade: you'll be fine if you know what you're doing, but God help you if you don't! Realistically, if you're reading "Learn C The Hard Way," you don't know what you're doing yet. Don't use strcpy. For that matter, you're human. You screw up sometimes. We all do. Don't use strcpy without a damn good reason. Is there ever a legitimate reason to use strcpy over strncpy?