Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!mailrus!bbn!gatech!emcard!mat
From: mat@emcard.UUCP (W Mat Waites)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: /usr/minix/amoeba/examples/client3.c
Message-ID: <6810@emcard.UUCP>
Date: 22 Mar 89 19:06:35 GMT
References: <11077@louie.udel.EDU> <27232@cci632.UUCP>
Reply-To: mat@emcard.UUCP (W Mat Waites)
Organization: Emory Univ CDB
Lines: 48

In article <27232@cci632.UUCP> tvf@ccird7.UUCP (Tom Frauenhofer) writes:
>In article <11077@louie.udel.EDU> jnall%FSU.BITNET@cunyvm.cuny.edu (John Nall 904-644-5241) writes:
>>pointed out to me that Andy's sample remote file client program,
>>client3.c, does not work because the main routine has a read statement
>>which is of the form  "if ((n=read(fd,buf,bytes) < 0))" and, as stated
>>on page 15 of K&R, this always sets n to 0 or 1, rather than the number
>>of bytes read.
>
>The code is correct.  If there is an error with the read, it returns -1.
>Check page 160, K&R, section 8.2 (Low Level I/O - Read and Write), the second
>paragraph (the one that begins "Each call returns..." - the paragraph after
>the sample code).
>
>Thomas V. Frauenhofer	...!rutgers!rochester!cci632!ccird7!tvf

Sorry, but.... What a weenie!

Did you _read_ page 15? How about page 215 where the priority of operators
is explicitly listed?

I think not!

The original fragment:

	if ((n=read(fd,buf,bytes) < 0))

is equivalent to:

	if ((n=(read(fd,buf,bytes) < 0)))
		   ^                      ^
		   (new parens)

not:

	if (((n=read(fd,buf,bytes)) < 0))
		 ^                    ^

I assume the original author meant the second modification.

It is this kind of instant, authoritative smelling, incorrect information
that makes Usenet a poor information source for the uninitiated.

Mat

-- 
W Mat Waites            | Oh, I used to be disgusted, but now I'm just amused.
gatech!emcard!mat       | Since their wings got rusted, you know the angels
8-5 ET: (404) 727-7197  |    wanna wear my red shoes  --E. Costello