[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [MiNT] iscntrl(EOF)
Guido Flohr <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
|> On Tue, Mar 07, 2000 at 04:44:30PM +0100, Andreas Schwab wrote:
|> > |> 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.
|> Sure, they are, but in <ctype.h>:
|> #define iscntrl(c) (_ctype[(unsigned char) (c)] & _CTc)
This is just broken.
|> If UCHAR_MAX (255) and EOF (-1) should produce different results I have to
|> use a macro that evaluates its arguments twice (at least for non-gcc
|> Hm, maybe it is cleverer to allow negative subscripts into the _ctype
|> array instead and remove the cast to unsigned char.
Andreas Schwab "And now for something
SuSE Labs completely different."
SuSE GmbH, Schanzäckerstr. 10, D-90443 Nürnberg