Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!decwrl!pa.dec.com!decuac!hussar.dco.dec.com!mjr
From: mjr@hussar.dco.dec.com (Marcus J. Ranum)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.programmer
Subject: Re: Complexity of reallocating storage (was users command crap)
Message-ID: <1991Feb07.165437.1289@decuac.dec.com>
Date: 7 Feb 91 16:54:37 GMT
References: <8921@sail.LABS.TEK.COM> <1991Feb07.013637.6542@convex.com> <9646@dog.ee.lbl.gov>
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp., Washington Ultrix Resource Center
Lines: 25

torek@ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek) writes:
>many more programs now say
>
>	(void) fprintf(stderr,
>	    "foo: cannot open %s for reading: %s\n", file, strerror(errno));
>
>instead of
>
>	perror(file);
>
>(I find it rather appalling to see how much longer the `good' version is
>in a side by side, er, bottom by top, comparison like this.  Still, it
>seems worth it.)

	In the case of most of the code I've seen, I'm thrilled to death
to see perror() being used. Fortunately, code like:

	if((fd = open("foo",flags,mode)) < 0) {
		printf("can't open file, errno is %d\n",errno);
		exit(1);
	}

	seems to be on its way out.

mjr.