Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!ncis.llnl.gov!ncis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ucbvax!decwrl!purdue!bu-cs!mirror!frog!john From: john@frog.UUCP (John Woods) Newsgroups: comp.sources.d Subject: Re: Comments on INSERT.c Message-ID: <1365@X.UUCP> Date: 19 Jan 89 06:25:00 GMT References: <308@twwells.uucp> <333@twwells.uucp> Organization: Servants of the Great White Frog Lines: 21 In article <333@twwells.uucp>, bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) writes: >In article <1354@X.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods) writes: >:In article <313@twwells.uucp>, bill@twwells.uucp (T. William Wells) writes: >:> : > 3) The unnecessary code sequences. The lseek's >:> The lseek's are completely unnecessary, regardless of omissions in >:> the man page. And of course, one should use standard I/O anyway. >:> >:I just checked the 3 Nov 87 draft of the ANSI C spec. I was astonished to >:find that they do not say what the value of the file pointer is after >:opening a pathname. Could someone with a recent copy check on this? > > It's in 4.9.3 of the May 88 draft. Which, I find, is where it is in the old draft (and not under the open() section). Grr. -- John Woods, Charles River Data Systems, Framingham MA, (508) 626-1101 ...!decvax!frog!john, john@frog.UUCP, ...!mit-eddie!jfw, jfw@eddie.mit.edu Presumably this means that it is vital to get the wrong answers quickly. Kernighan and Plauger, The Elements of Programming Style