On 06/29/2018 03:45 AM, Geoff Clare wrote:
Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> wrote, on 28 Jun 2018:
I'm forwarding an email originally sent to the Cygwin list. What do others
think? Is there enough grounds in the argument below that the CX-shading in
POSIX is too strict compared to existing implementations, and that I ought
to open a bug to change the wording on the requirements of perror() vs.
stdout orientation?
This issue arose in 2005 when C99 TC2 added perror() to the list of
byte input/output functions and created a conflict with POSIX. The
end result was that C99 TC3 removed it so that POSIX would not need
to change.
See http://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/dr_322.htm
Although not in the C standard, we should also make sure that psignal()
and psiginfo() have the same treatment as whatever we decide for
perror(), since all three share the wording about "shall not change the
orientation of the standard error stream".
--
Eric Blake, Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. +1-919-301-3266
Virtualization: qemu.org | libvirt.org
