Article View: comp.std.c
Article #2627Re: proper semi-portable use of signal()?
From: Chris Torek
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1991 18:13
Date: Thu, 28 Mar 1991 18:13
15 lines
1275 bytes
1275 bytes
In article <15605@smoke.brl.mil> gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes: >The signal handler function does NOT have a variable argument list, >but always receives precisely one argument of type int. The ,... is >a bogus attempt to accommodate 4.2BSD-style signal handers. If some >recent modification has been made to POSIX.1 that requires this, it >is WRONG and in general incompatible with the C standard. The word on the streets is that current POSIX drafts *do* require more than one argument. It was probably a mistake for ANSI X3.159-1989 and POSIX to attempt to share the name `signal' and the type `signal handler' at all. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Lawrence Berkeley Lab CSE/EE (+1 415 486 5427) Berkeley, CA Domain: torek@ee.lbl.gov
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<11568@dog.ee.lbl.gov>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!dog.ee.lbl.gov!elf.ee.lbl.gov!torekReferences:
<3223@charon.cwi.nl> <15605@smoke.brl.mil>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!dog.ee.lbl.gov!elf.ee.lbl.gov!torek From: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: proper semi-portable use of signal()? Message-ID: <11568@dog.ee.lbl.gov> Date: 28 Mar 91 18:13:21 GMT References: <3223@charon.cwi.nl> <15605@smoke.brl.mil> Reply-To: torek@elf.ee.lbl.gov (Chris Torek) Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, Berkeley Lines: 15 X-Local-Date: Thu, 28 Mar 91 10:13:21 PST