Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!purdue!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Bug in MS C unlink() ?
Message-ID: <9849@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 14 Mar 89 02:12:31 GMT
References: <89Mar13.100742est.10755@ephemeral.ai.toronto.edu> <1205@naucse.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <1205@naucse.UUCP> jdc@naucse.UUCP (John Campbell) writes:
>Oh well, I just followed up to suggest that MSC and PC implementors shouldn't
>provide an unlink() that is not compatible with the unix counter part.  ...
>Also, I have wished, at times, that unix programmers would 
>unlink() since this is a very operating specific idea.

The pANS requires the C environment to provide remove(), which is similar
to the UNIX unlink() except that there are no portable promises made for
removing an active file, etc.  Removing a file is hardly operating-system
specific; it's the notion that I/O can still be done to a removed file if
you still have a handle to it that's OS-specific.