Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ritcv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!spw2562
From: spw2562@ritcv.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Prepending _ in C external names necessary?
Message-ID: <9148@ritcv.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 10-Dec-85 14:14:51 EST
Article-I.D.: ritcv.9148
Posted: Tue Dec 10 14:14:51 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 12-Dec-85 06:35:12 EST
References: <200@brl-tgr.ARPA> <9109@ritcv.UUCP> <13697@rochester.UUCP>
Reply-To: spw2562@ritcv.UUCP (Fishhook)
Distribution: net
Organization: Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, NY
Lines: 21

In article <13697@rochester.UUCP> ken@rochester.UUCP (Ipse dixit) writes:
>Ah, but all the assembler symbols like r6 are short. If ...
>-- 
>UUCP: ..!{allegra,decvax,seismo}!rochester!ken ARPA: ken@rochester.arpa
You're considering strictly assembler symbols.  I was refering also to
global names from libraries, et al, that are currently defined by (in?)
the assembler.  For example, say assembler ZZZ has 4 characters significance.
What will differentiate(sp?) a call to 'exit' from a call to 'exit_'?
'exit' and '_exit' are easy to differentiate.  I think that pre-pending
is much less likely to fail than appending.
But don't take that as a guarantee.. 8-)

==============================================================================
        Steve Wall @ Rochester Institute of Technology
        USnail: 6675 Crosby Rd, Lockport, NY 14094, USA
        Usenet: ..!rochester!ritcv!spw2562 (Fishhook)   Unix 4.2 BSD
        BITNET: SPW2562@RITVAXC (Snoopy)                VAX/VMS 4.2
        Voice:  Yell "Hey Steve!"

    Disclaimer:  What I just said may or may not have anything to do
                 with what I was actually thinking...