Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!linac!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!goanna!ok
From: ok@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au (Richard A. O'Keefe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: What's so bad about scanf anyway??? (really what's bad about gets)
Summary: one last attempt
Message-ID: <4388@goanna.cs.rmit.oz.au>
Date: 28 Nov 90 06:25:59 GMT
References: <3797@skye.ed.ac.uk> <1990Nov22.071319.3222@ericsson.se> <1990Nov27.110005.7203@ericsson.se>
Organization: Comp Sci, RMIT, Melbourne, Australia
Lines: 17

>Let <EOF> represent your end-of-file character on a UNIX system

In article <1990Nov27.110005.7203@ericsson.se>, epames@eos.ericsson.se (Michael Salmon) writes:
> I think that the substantial point is that there is no "end-of-file
> character".

According to the UNIX manuals, there *IS*.  The end of file character is
a character you type on the keyboard.  Nobody has ever claimed that read()
or gets() or getchar() *return* this character to the caller, or that they
themselves ever see it.  Never mind whether the name is confusing, that *IS*
the name used in the UNIX manuals.

To those who understood the point the first time, sorry to have troubled
you.  To anyone who still thinks 'that there is no "end-of-file character"'
on a UNIX system, do us all a favour, *read* *the* *fine* *manuals*.
-- 
I am not now and never have been a member of Mensa.		-- Ariadne.