| From: | "Simon 'corecode' Schubert" <corecode@xxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Thu, 7 Jul 2005 02:09:18 +0200 |
Lately Joerg Sonnenberger <joerg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2005 at 04:45:08PM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: > > > > :*sigh* Which behaviour should be used instead? It can't return an error, > > :because this functions are not supposed to return errors. Second, it can't > > :return an arbitrary value, because that can be considered wrong too. > > :Third, it can't magically cast them to unsigned, because 255 is a valid letter > > :in UTF8, but also (signed)255 == EOF. > > Joerg, just because the standard says undefined doesn't give us license > > to allow an API function to randomly overflow an array and return garbage. > > It just doesn't, and we aren't going to do it. It's totally > > inappropriate, in fact. libc has to be more robust then that. > It returns as much garbage as FreeBSD returned. Returning '0' for an invalid > argument is as invalid as any other value. it's not invalid. it's "undefined". but in a way we think it makes sense. strictly conforming programs won't have problems with that. cheers simon -- Serve - BSD +++ RENT this banner advert +++ ASCII Ribbon /"\ Work - Mac +++ space for low $$$ NOW!1 +++ Campaign \ / Party Enjoy Relax | http://dragonflybsd.org Against HTML \ Dude 2c 2 the max ! http://golden-apple.biz Mail + News / \
Attachment:
pgp00012.pgp
Description: PGP signature