Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!unido!laura!br
From: br@laura.UUCP (Bodo Rueskamp)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: null fill eliminated
Message-ID: <362@laura.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jun 88 17:23:38 GMT
References: <490@philmds.UUCP> <1067@atari.UUCP> <2657@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk>
Reply-To: br@unido.UUCP (Bodo Rueskamp)
Organization: University of Dortmund, W-Germany
Lines: 15

In article <2657@bath63.ux63.bath.ac.uk> pes@ux63.bath.ac.uk (Smee) writes:
>I was always taught, that you
>should **NEVER** write a program which depends upon ANYTHING being ANYWHERE
>in storage

K&R say, that global static storage is zeroed before the main program is
executed. This null fill has to be done by the OS or the startup module.

Because the null fill is done by GEMDOS, no startup module touches the
uninitialized static storage. If the null fill is eliminated,
most C programs will bomb.

--
Bodo Rueskamp
br@unido.uucp