Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!hsdndev!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.bugs.4bsd
Subject: Re: Bug in users command
Message-ID: <18928:Jan1916:26:3291@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 19 Jan 91 16:26:32 GMT
References: <18947@rpp386.cactus.org> <1126:Jan1811:17:4091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <18958@rpp386.cactus.org>
Organization: IR
Lines: 21

In article <18958@rpp386.cactus.org> jfh@rpp386.cactus.org (John F Haugh II) writes:
> In article <1126:Jan1811:17:4091@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
> >second, scmp() appears to take the wrong argument types. Here is a
> Look at the array that is being sorted.  It will be pretty obvious
> once you look at the type of that object that scmp is being called
> properly.

No. Unless I'm mistaken, the objects being passed in are pointers to
arrays of char, while the objects expected are pointers to char. There
is no implicit conversion that justifies this, though undoubtedly it
works on most machines.

> And obviously, since the sort does work, it is being
> called with the correct values.

Obviously there aren't any extra levels of indirection, but that doesn't
make the code right.

Anyway, the 200-user limit is purely silly.

---Dan