Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ki4pv.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxn!mhuxm!mhuxf!mhuxi!mhuhk!mhuxt!houxm!hropus!ki4pv!tanner
From: tanner@ki4pv.UUCP (Tanner Andrews)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: Re: Pids
Message-ID: <6902@ki4pv.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 2-May-86 14:18:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: ki4pv.6902
Posted: Fri May  2 14:18:37 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 4-May-86 04:40:37 EDT
References: <266@brl-smoke.ARPA>, <1219@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Organization: CompuData South, DeLand
Lines: 14

] 5) Any reason not to use unsigned pids?...

Unsigned pid would really give fits to the old but well-loved test
	if  ((pid = fork()) < 0)
		die(horrible_death);

In fact, with unsigned being used, you'd have a very hard time
distinguishing between
	(failing fork() == -1)
and
	(working fork == 0xFFFF)	/* may be 0xFFFFFFFF on vaxen */

-- 
<std dsclm, copies upon request>	   Tanner Andrews