[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MiNT] iscntrl(EOF)
- To: Guido Flohr <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [MiNT] iscntrl(EOF)
- From: Andreas Schwab <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 16:44:30 +0100
- Cc: MiNT mailing list <email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: Guido Flohr's message of "Fri, 3 Mar 2000 16:11:09 +0100"
- References: <20000227002312.A283@stud> <200002281428.PAA27026@hawking.suse.de> <20000303161109.B24@stud>
- Sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
- User-agent: Gnus/5.0803 (Gnus v5.8.3) Emacs/21.0.90
Guido Flohr <email@example.com> writes:
|> sorry for the delay. I was away again.
|> On Mon, Feb 28, 2000 at 03:28:29PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> > Guido Flohr <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
|> > |> Hi,
|> > |>
|> > |> in the absence of any reliable C reference I can only guess what
|> > |> "iscntrl (EOF)" should return. IMHO EOF should be classified as a control
|> > |> character in the C locale. The GNU libc says it isn't a control
|> > |> character.
|> > |>
|> > |> Could anybody check that either in the standard or on other platforms?
|> > ISO C says that the domain of the <ctype.h> functions is
|> > UCHAR_MIN..UCHAR_MAX + EOF. They all shall return false for EOF, since
|> > that is not a character and thus cannot have any of the tested properties.
|> Does ISO C explicitely say that is*(EOF) should always return zero?
Not explicitly, but it is implied.
|> If so I would have to surrender and arrange for EOF not being a control
|> character whereas 255 (UCHAR_MAX) would be one. But I don't like that
|> because a construct like
|> if (iscntrl (c))
|> cast_it ();
|> would fail then for c == EOF.
What does UCHAR_MAX have to do with EOF? They are distinct values.
Andreas Schwab "And now for something
SuSE Labs completely different."
SuSE GmbH, Schanzäckerstr. 10, D-90443 Nürnberg