Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!texbell!nuchat!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Style (was: C-DATABASE B-PLUS a quick look)
Message-ID: <2581@ficc.uu.net>
Date: 29 Dec 88 19:49:21 GMT
References: <2537@xyzzy.UUCP>
Organization: Xenix Support
Lines: 29

In article <2537@xyzzy.UUCP>, throopw@xyzzy.UUCP (Wayne A. Throop) writes:
>     #include <ctype.h>
>     char *p, *s;
>     ...
>     for( p = s; *p; ++p )
>         *p = toupper( *p );

> Nearly as I can tell, dpANS says that loop ought to have been

>     for( p = s; *p ++p )
>         if( *p >= 0 )
>             *p = toupper( *p );

Gee, I always do this:

	for(p = s; *p; p++)
		if(islower(*p))
			*p = toupper(*p);

While dpANS might have decided that toupper should bounds check, there
are too many V7-oid compilers out there that it's better to put the
bounds check in. Personally, I think that toupper should have been left
the way it was. Everything else in stdio forces you to do your own bounds
checking, so why should this be an exception?
-- 
Peter da Silva, Xenix Support, Ferranti International Controls Corporation.
Work: uunet.uu.net!ficc!peter, peter@ficc.uu.net, +1 713 274 5180.   `-_-'
Home: bigtex!texbell!sugar!peter, peter@sugar.uu.net.                 'U`
Opinions may not represent the policies of FICC or the Xenix Support group.