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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 10db24,fec75f150a0d78f5 X-Google-Attributes: gid10db24,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,df854b5838c3e14 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: karish@pangea.Stanford.EDU (Chuck Karish) Subject: Re: ANSI C and POSIX (was Re: C/C++ knocks the crap out of Ada) Date: 1996/04/12 Message-ID: <4kke7m$ilr@nntp.Stanford.EDU>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 147026012 references: <828903511snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <4kgjrc$4d@news.nyu.edu> organization: Mindcraft, Inc. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.edu Date: 1996-04-12T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <4kgjrc$4d@news.nyu.edu>, halvin wrote: >Lawrence Kirby writes: >this might be slightly off-topic, but isn't there a difference between the >ANSI and POSIX versions of fprintf? if i remember correctly, the ANSI version >returns 0 on success and EOF on failure -- but the POSIX version returns the >number of characters printed, or a negative number to indicate failure. POSIX.1 defers to the C Standard for the specification of fprintf(). Where POSIX.1 does add requirements on the behavior of C Standard features, the intent is always to enforce a more specific requirement without violating the C Standard. Any conflict between POSIX.1 and Standard C is unintentional and is considered an error to be fixed by the POSIX committees. -- Chuck Karish karish@mindcraft.com (415) 323-9000 x117 karish@pangea.stanford.edu