Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!nuchat!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: why "gmtime" but not "read" and "write"?
Message-ID: <813@sugar.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 24-Sep-87 23:24:56 EDT
Article-I.D.: sugar.813
Posted: Thu Sep 24 23:24:56 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Sep-87 18:18:46 EDT
References: <706@sugar.UUCP> <8617@utzoo.UUCP>
Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX
Lines: 25

In article <8617@utzoo.UUCP>, henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes:
> > ... Since most non-UNIX-based 'C' compilers
> > in the real world implement read and write and *not* gmtime and localtime,
> > you don't even have precedent behind you.
> 
> You mean, most poorly-written C compilers on rather Unix-like systems.

Well, most non-UNIX systems don't even provide enough information to the
library to meaningfully implement both gmtime and localtime. The first
compiler I've run across with gmtime and localtime is the Aztec 'C'
compiler on the Amiga. Both functions give the same results, and neither
implement daylight savings time. This is useful?

The only C compiler I know of that didn't implement open, close, read, and
write was the original BDS-C library on the Z-80. It implemented fopen and
fclose with open/close semantics, fprintf with the first argument being an
integer, and so on. I suppose this was a well-written compiler.

Well, it did run like a demon. It was written in assembly.

Wanna come up with some examples?
-- 
-- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter
--                 'U`  Have you hugged your wolf today?
-- Disclaimer: These aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.