In other words, there actually is an SSE/SSE2/AVX implementation in glibc.
This copy in plain C is the fall-back to if the porter didn't implement strlen in assembly for the architecture they were porting to.
It is a reasonable guess at a somewhat architecturally-independent fast implementation. If someone really cares about squeezing all the performance they could out of strlen, they implement the assembly version.
Beyond that, many architectures that gcc supports don't include prefetchers, vector units and all the rest. The world is not all x86.
2) Mostly not. gcc and clans don't vectorize "search loops" i.e. loops that terminate early based on some condition. These loops are tricky to vectorize at least partly because of the reading-beyond-the-end issue mentioned in the accepted answer. icc does vectorize some search loops, not sure if it would do a good job on this one. I'm not sure about MSVC, but it's usually way behind on everything optimization related so I think we can assume not.
3. Yes definitely. glibc has such implementations for popular platforms like x86, so this code isn't actually being used on your PC say.
Is it? We have to ask a few questions:
1. Is it actually faster on today's CPUs? (Any linear memory access pattern is going to be detected by the prefetcher)
2. Would the compiler do the same or better? eg, could it be auto-vectorizing the loop if we didn't play tricks?
3. If we really care about trading complexity for speed, wouldn't a hand-written SSE/SSE2/AVX implementation be even faster? Why not spend our complexity budget there?