Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!apple!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!nuchat!moray!urchin!p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org!Bob.Stout
From: Bob.Stout@p6.f506.n106.z1.fidonet.org (Bob Stout)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: string comparisons in C
Message-ID: <17191.24C32406@urchin.fidonet.org>
Date: 17 Jul 89 15:57:22 GMT
Sender: ufgate@urchin.fidonet.org (newsout1.26)
Organization: FidoNet node 1:106/506.6 - Fulcrum's Edge, Spring TX
Lines: 16

In an article of <13 Jul 89 22:30:56 GMT>, (Richard E. Covert) writes:

 >P.S. Does anyone know if pnmatch() is implemented on other C compilers??

I don't believe so, but it's available in many 3rd party libraries. For  
example, one library (for TC and ZTC) that I contributed to has a similar  
function I wrote called wildname() which does the same thing and optionally  
allows either or both DOS or Unix style match-all patterns (i.e. either "." or  
"*" in addition to "*.*"). For DOS programmers, it also offers smarter pattern  
matching since it understands embedded '*' characters. 

  But the real issue is whether vendors should sprinkle these tempting little  
non-standard functions in their "standard" libraries. It seems unlikely that  
the practice can be curtailed since it offers a marketing advantage to the  
uninitiated, but at least they should be identified as non-portable and  
isolated via separate header files, etc.