Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!rutgers!ames!hc!beta!unm-la!unmvax!turing!mike
From: mike@turing.unm.edu (Mike Bushnell)
Newsgroups: news.software.b,comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: News for Xenix on PC AT ?
Message-ID: <476@unmvax.UNM.EDU>
Date: Mon, 27-Apr-87 14:27:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: unmvax.476
Posted: Mon Apr 27 14:27:00 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 29-Apr-87 02:09:25 EDT
References: <18346@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU> <145@sds.UUCP> <17005@sun.uucp> <2440@ulysses.homer.nj.att.com> <148@sds.UUCP>
Sender: news@unmvax.UNM.EDU
Reply-To: mike@turing.UUCP (Mike Bushnell)
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Lines: 16
Xref: mnetor news.software.b:555 comp.lang.c:1923

In article <148@sds.UUCP> dave@sds.UUCP (dave schmidt x194) writes:
>...
>On the other hand, if 0 cannot be a valid function address, why does
>signal not return 0 on error?  I would be curious to know.
>
>Dave Schmidt

Because *every* function in section 2 of the manual returns -1 on an error.
It just happens that signal is one of the very few which normally return
pointers.  If compiler writers were *really* nasty, they could make this
bomb.  Fortunately, they are on our side.  I like to cast signal to an int
before checking for -1 just to be on the safe side.

					Michael I. Bushnell
					a/k/a Bach II
					hi!turing!mike@hc.dspo.gov