Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!decvax!ima!cfisun!lakart!dg
From: dg@lakart.UUCP (David Goodenough)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: C optimizer
Message-ID: <453@lakart.UUCP>
Date: 28 Feb 89 17:02:35 GMT
References: <36662@think.UUCP>
Organization: Lakart Corporation, Newton, MA
Lines: 21

From article <36662@think.UUCP>, by barmar@think.COM (Barry Margolin):
] In article <1028@frog.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods) writes:
]>I think that if
]>	(getpid() != getpid())
]>ever evaluated to 1, I would be severely astonished.
] 
] Well, how about
] 
] 	(pid = getpid(), (void) fork(), pid != getpid())
] 
] ?  It will evaluate to 0 in the parent process, 1 in the child
] process.

True - but I don't see any references to fork() in Mr.Woods' posting.
What he is stating is that _IN THE ABSENCE_ of fork() calls, getpid()
had better return an unchanging value.
-- 
	dg@lakart.UUCP - David Goodenough		+---+
						IHS	| +-+-+
	....... !harvard!xait!lakart!dg			+-+-+ |
AKA:	dg%lakart.uucp@xait.xerox.com		  	  +---+