Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!ira.uka.de!fauern!opal!tmpmbx!scuzzy!src From: src@scuzzy.in-berlin.de (Heiko Blume) Newsgroups: comp.unix.programmer Subject: Re: List of routines safe to use in signals? Message-ID: <1990Dec13.022804.7712@scuzzy.in-berlin.de> Date: 13 Dec 90 02:28:04 GMT References: <1960@necisa.ho.necisa.oz> <59190@brunix.UUCP> <1990Dec12.050527.2152@athena.mit.edu> Organization: Contributed Software Lines: 24 jik@athena.mit.edu (Jonathan I. Kamens) writes: >If the man page (or, more recently, the ANSI spec, or >the POSIX spec, or whatever) for the function says that it's reentrant, >then it is, and you can count on it being reentrant. you *DO* believe in man pages, not to speak of specifications????? >However, if that is not >specified, then you cannot make any assumptions about whether or not the >function is reentrant. you still can't make any assumptions if it is specified. you can only *hope* it'll work, unless you've got the source and are able to *proof* it. if you try it with n different scenarios, then you can say "it worked these n times". nothing more. don't get me wrong, but there are so many things that are in the man page, but just don't work. -- Heiko Blume <-+-> src@scuzzy.in-berlin.de <-+-> (+49 30) 691 88 93 public source archive [HST V.42bis]: scuzzy Any ACU,f 38400 6919520 gin:--gin: nuucp sword: nuucp uucp scuzzy!/src/README /your/home