On Thu, 19 Dec 2019 15:50:07 +0000 "Lavrentiev, Anton (NIH/NLM/NCBI) [C] via cygwin-patches" wrote: > Just noticed that in the patch below and couldn't help it, sorry.. > > Things like > > char* p0; > > and later: > > isdigit(*p0)) or isalpha(*p0) > > are usually not a good (correct) way of coding, because of possible sign > extension of *p0 > which you normally wouldn't want to have (remember the ctype calls/macros > actually expect > an "int", not a character, input). So it should be either "unsigned char* > p0" or > "isdigit((unsigned char)(*p0))", generally.
Thanks for the advice. In general, you are right. However, in cygwin, ALLOW_NEGATIVE_CTYPE_INDEX is defined in ctype library in newlib, and the lookup table is extended in the negative direction. So, in terms of results, the code works as expected. -- Takashi Yano <takashi.y...@nifty.ne.jp>
