Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!ucsd!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!romp!auschs!d75!cello!toysrus!dcm
From: dcm@toysrus.uucp (dcm)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Why isn't argv[argc]==(char *)0 ?
Message-ID: <3053@cello.UUCP>
Date: 20 Nov 89 16:21:06 GMT
References: <547.nlhp3@oracle.nl> <11606@smoke.BRL.MIL> <1979@uwbull.uwbln.UUCP>
Sender: news@cello.UUCP
Reply-To: dcm@toysrus.UUCP (dcm)
Distribution: comp
Organization: IBM AWD, Austin, TX
Lines: 19

Well, just to throw in my $.02, K&R #2 states "additionally, the standard
requires that argv[argc] be a null pointer." (p 115)

But, both the 1st and 2nd editions take great care in using argc to
walk thru argv, not argv[argc] != NULL.  I don't think they *ever* do
a (while *argv != NULL)...

Argc should always be correct.  Who cares about argv[argc]?

I remember a VMS system some years ago where argv[0] was "main" or
something idiotic like that.  Err.

	Craig Miller
	..!cs.utexas.edu!ibmaus!auschs!toysrus.austin.ibm.com!dcm
--------
	Craig Miller
	contractor @ IBM Austin
	UUCP: ..!cs.utexas.edu!ibmaus!auschs!toysrus.austin.ibm.com!dcm
	"I don't believe in .signatures."