home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c
- Path: news.dcs.warwick.ac.uk!not-for-mail
- From: A.Main@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Zefram)
- Subject: Re: brief summary of Technical Corrigendum 2
- X-Nntp-Posting-Host: stone
- Message-ID: <1996Jan24.182115.26078@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>
- Sender: news@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Network News)
- Organization: Department of Computer Science, Warwick University, England
- References: <4d554m$q4b@news1.halcyon.com> <4dnq5b$t9a@der.twinsun.com> <1996Jan21.220541.28634@dcs.warwick.ac.uk> <KANZE.96Jan22153648@slsvewt.lts.sel.alcatel.de>
- Date: Wed, 24 Jan 1996 18:21:15 GMT
-
- James Kanze US/ESC 60/3/141 #40763 <kanze@lts.sel.alcatel.de> wrote:
- >In article <1996Jan21.220541.28634@dcs.warwick.ac.uk>
- >A.Main@dcs.warwick.ac.uk (Zefram) writes:
- >|> Do you mean cases like "abc\0xyz" and "abc", which could compare as equal?
- >
- >For a suitable definition of compare equal, of course. They might be
- >at the same address in memory, of course. And strcmp will state that
- >they are equal.
- >
- >What definition of compare equal did you have in mind?
-
- I meant "abc\0xyz"=="abc", which the standard now seems to permit. (Of
- course, "abc\0xyz"!="abc" is equally legal.)
-
- -zefram
-