ft_strclpy

[Alienxbe]

Actually the function ft_strlcpy shouldn't be protected. But in your unit test it's needed.

[alelievr]

Are you sure about it? There is a test to prevent people from protecting it from null:

void        test_ft_strlcpy_null(void *ptr) {
    typeof(strlcpy) *ft_strlcpy = ptr;
    SET_EXPLANATION("your strlcpy doe not segfault when null parameter is sent");

    SANDBOX_PROT(
            ft_strlcpy(NULL, NULL, 10);
            );
}

[reysand]

I think he meant it:

100

[alelievr]

Yes, I misread the issue, it should be fixed now

[see7e]

I know that this issue is closed but the return value of the function is an int and shouldn't return a NULL pointer as your test expects.

ft_strlcpy      : [OK] [OK] [OK] [OK] [OK] [OK] [NO CRASH] 
[no crash]: your strlcpy doe not segfault when null parameter is sent

This raise

if (!dest && !src)
        return (NULL);

✖ Executing: make fclean all bonus
ft_strlcpy.c: In function ‘ft_strlcpy’:
ft_strlcpy.c:23:10: error: returning ‘void *’ from a function with return type ‘unsigned int’ makes integer from pointer without a cast [-Werror=int-conversion]
   23 |   return (NULL);
      |          ^
cc1: all warnings being treated as errors
make: *** [<builtin>: ft_strlcpy.o] Error 1