🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <danpop.824829220@rscernix>, danpop@mail.cern.ch says...

>Those who're really interested in the differences should be sent to a 
>platform specific newsgroup, because the differences _are_ platform specific.

I'll buy that. You're right. Truth be told, my original post was made from
the comp.os.msdos.programmer group. I didn't bother to look at the groups
in the header, so that was my mistake. Sorry. I'm just arguing with you
for the sake of arguing. 

> A very good reason to prefer stdio even if you decide (for whatever reason) 
> to disable the stdio buffering.

Another good point, Dan.

>Right.  But to say that the value of BUFSIZ is set to 512 in <stdio.h>
>is both wrong and misleading.  Saying: "on my system/platform/compiler
>BUFSIZ is set to 512 in <stdio.h>" would have been perfectly OK, although
>fairly irrelevant, since neither comp.os.msdos.programmer nor 
>comp.lang.c are dedicated to your particular compiler.

It isn't nearly as much fun agreeing with you, Dan. But, you're right
again.

>Could you post the paragraphs (from this particular thread) which gave
>you this impression?

The same applies to other operating systems (e.g. Unix) except that they
do a much better job at buffering I/O than MSDOS.

>Are you sure this question belongs to these newsgroups?  Keep your cheap
>sarcasms for yourself, please.

I don't know if it belongs *to* these newsgroups or not. It probably 
doesn't belong in *this* newsgroup. As a matter of fact, your posting
of the old April Fool's joke about the C/UNIX hoax seems a wee bit off
topic itself. Mind you, it doesn't bother me in the least, but I would 
think you'd know better.

You're one serious man, Dan. I've read a lot of your posts, so I know
you have at least a slight sense of humor. Lighten up. By the way, is 
your middle name, by chance, Persnickety? Dan Persnickety Pop! That has 
a nice ring to it.

-John