Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!cmcl2!nrl-cmf!ames!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!hpcea!hpfcdc!boemker
From: boemker@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Tim Boemker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Is 0 a unique number? (was: Re: exit(-1), 0 is sometimes magic)
Message-ID: <5080016@hpfcdc.HP.COM>
Date: 19 Jan 88 21:56:17 GMT
References: <1595@rtech.UUCP>
Organization: HP Ft. Collins, Co.
Lines: 17

> In article <21531@yale-celray.yale.UUCP> leichter@yale-celray.UUCP (Jerry Leichter) writes:
>>On the other hand, the NAMES and their respective meanings would make sense
>>on any operating system.

> No!  Many operating systems cannot return such a variety of termination
> statuses.  And it would do little good to have several of them mapped
> into the same value.  Plus, there are zillions of possible reasons for
> program failure, and any pre-established list cannot cover enough of them.

> I think we're doing quite well to get just the two, generic failure and
> generic success, standardized.

I think that Jerry meant that a header file would map an individual program's
symbolic exit returns to values that make sense on the host machine.  He is
not suggesting that the names used be standardized.

Tim Boemker