home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: news.nyu.edu!schonberg!dewar
- From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.edu
- Subject: Re: ANSI C and POSIX (was Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada)
- Date: 8 Apr 1996 00:15:37 -0400
- Organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
- Message-ID: <dewar.828936837@schonberg>
- References: <JSA.96Feb16135027@organon.com> <dewar.828757752@schonberg> <danpop.828819479@rscernix> <dewar.828879781@schonberg> <4k9qhe$65r@solutions.solon.com>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: schonberg.cs.nyu.edu
- X-Newsreader: NN version 6.5.0 (NOV)
-
- Peter said
-
- "Now, as it happens, Linux does do the right thing - if I define my own
- read(), I get *my* read any time I call read, so the implementation is
- conforming."
-
- Boy, this sure has wandered! THe original issue was the semantic behavior
- of read. Unlike other unices, in Linux, the bounds check for the read
- buffer is based on the requested count, rather than the actual count
- of data bytes read. It is hard to say either approach is right or
- wrong, but they are different enough to cause portability problems.
-
-