Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think!snorkelwacker!spdcc!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: isascii (was: Another pitfall.  Signed chars and ctype.h)
Message-ID: <16024@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Date: 26 Feb 90 03:55:00 GMT
References: <1990Feb12.043324.5259@sq.sq.com> <680020@hpmwjaa.HP.COM>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Cambridge, MA 02138-5302
Lines: 24

In article <680020@hpmwjaa.HP.COM> jeffa@hpmwtd.HP.COM (Jeff Aguilera) writes:
>[Ray Butterworth wrote:]
>> [If isascii() were guaranteed for *all* characters,]
>> Then the missing isascii() wouldn't even be needed.
>> This was proposed to the Committee and rejected on the (incorrect)
>> grounds that it [would make the macro unsafe].
>
>Introduce the inline keyword, and then inline all the ctype functions.
>Simple solution, superior in all respects.

Unnecessary, since (as Ray noted) the unsafe-macro argument was *incorrect*:
the macro version would still evaluate the argument exactly once.

Insufficient, since (as I noted earlier) the real problem is with the
collision between signed chars and EOF.  This is a problem with the
specification itself, regardless of whether or not it's implemented as a
macro.

>(Gawd, ANSI C is brain dead.)

I suppose it is, but not because of anything you've said here.  I blame it on
heredity; pre-ANSI C was worse.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (karl@ima.ima.isc.com or harvard!ima!karl), The Walking Lint