Programming

Code:

char a[8];
c = sizeof(a);
strncpy( a, b, c );

If optimization is enabled, GCC will optimize away the second line of this code.

Thanks - that's pretty much what the takeaway has been.

In the code blocks here that gave rise to the conversation the sizeof was expressed in the using statements and not set as separate variables.

It seems that, for all practical purposes, the compiler treats sizeof as a placeholder for substituting the literal value of the size of the referenced item. That's good enough and is as far we need take it

Thanks again.
Geo. Salisbury
Long Valley, NJ

It hardwires it at compile time. As such, it gives a completely literal, unchanging result.

Thanks for re-stating it is a literal value.
That's what had been indicated thoughout the last couple of posts.
Done (again)