Re: Does getopt() return "-1", or "EOF", at end?

From: Doug Royer <Doug(at)royer(dot)com>
To: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Does getopt() return "-1", or "EOF", at end?
Date: 2002-01-09 22:59:20
Message-ID: 3C3CCB48.548585B@Royer.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Doug Royer <Doug(at)royer(dot)com> writes:
> > Would the correct question be, "what does POSIX define?". More
> > and more systems (at least Unix systems) are defining POSIX
> > interfaces. I don't have my POSIX CD here with me or I would
> > quote the getopt() definition. I ~think~ it says EOF, and
> > the target systems include files define what EOF means.
>
> I looked at the Single Unix Specification at
> http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/007908799/
> and their man page for getopt says "-1".
> I believe SUS is derived from POSIX among others.
> If POSIX does say EOF then we might have a conflict,
> but otherwise the tide seems to be running to -1.

It's probabily the same.

Tom Lane wrote:
>
> Doug Royer <Doug(at)royer(dot)com> writes:
> > And if the default for int or char is unsigned as it can
> > be on some systems, the code does exactly that.
>
> There are no systems where "int" means "unsigned int". That would break
> (to a first approximation) every C program in existence, as well as
> violate the ANSI C specification.

Your right - oops.

Attachment Content-Type Size
Doug.vcf text/x-vcard 363 bytes

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Tom Lane 2002-01-09 23:13:24 Re: pg_dump bug ... or not?
Previous Message Greg Sabino Mullane 2002-01-09 22:18:52 Bzip2 postgres tarballs