[asddubs]

could do this instead, right?

    do {
       *dst = *src;
       *dst++;
       *src++;
    } while(*dst);

[josefx]

I think you are not copying the terminating nul character.

[FartyMcFarter]

Unless the first character was null, in which case it would be ignored by the condition... Also, you don't need to dereference a pointer in order to increase it.

The grandparent post's code is just nonsensical.

[asddubs]

haha, I was genuinely asking if it made sense, I don't usually do C. Maybe it helped illustrate that the code is too clever for me, at least.

e: I submit my revised code:

    do {
       *dst = *src;
       src++;
       dst++;
    } while(*(dst - 1));

[asveikau]

Looking at src[-1] would work but feels like poor form. My advice is stop trying to make do ... while work here, it isn't looking good.

I feel like more idiomatic iterating through a string tends to loop on src not being a terminator.

    while (*src)
    {
       *dst = *src;
       ++src;
       ++dst;
    }

    *dst = '\0';

I feel like this is idiomatic C but needlessly verbose. Most people would combine the increment with the assignment. And most people would recognize putting it in the while condition as a common strcpy.