From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,9c86eb13dd395066
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Jim Balter <jqb@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: CRC in Ada?
Date: 1997/03/12
Message-ID: <3326B7A3.6ECF@netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 224934423
References: <1997Mar2.220652@nova.wright.edu> <1997Mar5.083233.1@eisner>
 	<E6Kxux.FL9@world.std.com> <1997Mar5.131846.1@eisner>
 	<E6Lpv3.AoL@world.std.com> <dewar.857652688@merv>
 <OHK.97Mar7080335@edeber.tfdt-o.nta.no> <dewar.857749952@merv>
 <3324A8B9.4A18@netcom.com> <dewar.858096812@merv> <3325DD47.565E@netcom.com>
 <dewar.858137671@merv>
Organization: JQB Enterprises
X-NETCOM-Date: Wed Mar 12  6:05:09 AM PST 1997
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-03-12T06:05:09-08:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


Robert Dewar wrote:
> 
> Jim said
> 
> <<It take an unusual degree of intellectual dishonesty to misrepresent
> one's own point.  No more talk here of extra system calls,
> buffering not being mandated, or the need to go out and empirically
> check 6 implementations.>>
> 
> No, sorry, you are confused, go back and check the thread, I never said
> that there were extra system calls, that was someone else with whom I
> disagreed!

I have already quoted you as saying that a single I/O call per block
by the *C library* (not a comment about ADA) is not guaranteed.
 
> As for buffering being mandated, I am not quite sure what you are talking
> about here.

Sorry to here that you are having so much trouble following the thread.

--
<J Q B>