Xref: utzoo comp.sys.atari.st:17771 comp.lang.c:19931
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!adam.pika.mit.edu!scs
From: scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: string comparisons in C
Keywords: C, atari st, mark williams
Message-ID: <12694@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Date: 15 Jul 89 17:59:09 GMT
References: <44672745.14a1f@gtephx.UUCP> <12689@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <10533@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Sender: daemon@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU
Reply-To: scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit)
Lines: 12

In article <10533@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>In article <12689@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit) writes:
>>No vendor should provide a routine named "pnmatch."
>That's based on a misunderstanding.  The actual constraint is that a
>vendor is not supposed to interfere with an application's having its
>own function (or external variable, or whatever) named "pnmatch".

Indeed.  I should know better than to post assertions about a
standard I've never actually read.

                                            Steve Summit
                                            scs@adam.pika.mit.edu