Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!bloom-beacon!mit-eddie!rutgers!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner
From: meissner@xyzzy.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: How big is the argv[] array?
Message-ID: <1430@xyzzy.UUCP>
Date: 8 Oct 88 22:40:19 GMT
References: <1239500004@osiris.cso.uiuc.edu> <8631@smoke.ARPA> <4206@bsu-cs.UUCP> <507@quintus.UUCP> <2989@mipos3.intel.com>
Reply-To: meissner@xyzzy.UUCP (Michael Meissner)
Organization: Data General (Languages @ Research Triangle Park, NC.)
Lines: 26

In article <507@quintus.UUCP>, ok@quintus (Richard A. O'Keefe) writes:
| Which are the implementations of C where argv[] is present but argv[argc]
| is not defined?

In article <2989@mipos3.intel.com> merlyn@intelob.intel.com (Randal L.
Schwartz @ Stonehenge) writes:

| Not so much undefined, as is different.  Dig out an old V6 or PWB UNIX
| manual, if you got'em.  In those beasties (back in the old days),
| 
| argv[argc] == -1
	...
| Just a bit of history.  If you are writing a program to port between
| 4.3-tahoe and a V6 system, beware! :-)

I agree that V6 had this misfeature (and AT&T corrected it in V7, which
is the basis for all modern UNIX systems).  However, if you did find
a V6 PDP-11 to port to, I would wager that this might be the least of
your troubles.  Both C and UNIX have changed a lot from those days.  I
wonder if there is any V6 systems still used for development these
days (I can believe that some are still chugging away on applications
written back then....).
-- 
Michael Meissner, Data General.

Uucp:	...!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!meissner
Arpa:	meissner@dg-rtp.DG.COM   (or) meissner%dg-rtp.DG.COM@relay.cs.net