Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site boring.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!mcvax!boring!guido
From: guido@boring.UUCP (Guido van Rossum)
Newsgroups: net.micro.pc,net.unix
Subject: rename library routine in Microsoft C 3.0
Message-ID: <6727@boring.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 15-Jan-86 12:51:41 EST
Article-I.D.: boring.6727
Posted: Wed Jan 15 12:51:41 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 17-Jan-86 06:22:57 EST
Reply-To: guido@mcvax.UUCP (Guido van Rossum)
Organization: "Stamp Out BASIC" Committee, CWI, Amsterdam
Lines: 17
Keywords: rename, BSD, Microsoft C 3.0
Xref: watmath net.micro.pc:6545 net.unix:6840
Summary: BSD says rename(old, new), MSC 3.0 says rename(new, old)
Apparently-To: rnews@mcvax

Today I was bitten by a difference in interpretation of rename's arguments
between my good old 4.2 BSD and the brand new (and otherwise GOOD!)
Microsoft C compiler (3.0).  BSD takes the first arg as the old file name
and renames it to the second arg; Microsoft's library does it the other way
around!
Could anyone (besides Jim Cottrell :-) argue who is wrong?
Lattice C (which used to be Microsoft C version 2.03) does it the BSD
way, but I believe this function was added after the version that
Microsoft sold was frozen.
What does system 5 do (if it has one of these routines)?
What does P1003 say about it?

PS: I prefer the BSD way because it mimics mv(1).  But I am willing
to trade my opinion for an established standard.

-- 
	Guido van Rossum, CWI, Amsterdam (guido@mcvax.UUCP)