Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am 15.02.2011 04:19, schrieb Julian H. Stacey: and the SUS is available free of charge, that's Again you fail to post a precise complete URL for free open anonymous reference. One might wonder your involvment with open.org/ISO/IEEE. I don't care to do the searching for you, nor discuss any of this, in particular because you are distracting from your actual getopt(3) concern with random sidesteps. And that's already one more reason that I've given than you've deserved. Let's stick to the technical discussion. language, 2nd edition, then getopt() isn't even in my printed book's index. Yet again: The point is to find the latest specification of C language const Before considering latest getopt(). No it isn't, that is another of your distractions. The explanations about const are all there and you haven't yet clarified your concern about const-ness of the argv pointers in said getopt argument. I don't care about policies, standardization, affiliations, unless you document the technical concern that you see in the const in getopt()'s char * const argv[] argument. And before that happens I'm not even interested in a pseudo-technical discussion. Try comp.lang.c for a change. -- Matthias Andree ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Bruce Cran wrote: It seems registration is required for the SUS, but you can get POSIX.1-2008 free at http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/ . Thanks Bruce. I browsed it but couldn't find a C spec. Opengroup.org server restricted the URL to a constant: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/nframe.html Hoping for full URLs (or more) I tried: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?reload=truepunumber=4694974 It needed a login. I created one. IEEE harvested my address then responded: Full text access is unavailable with your individual subscription Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Mail plain text; Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64. Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am 16.02.2011 19:31, schrieb Julian H. Stacey: Bruce Cran wrote: It seems registration is required for the SUS, but you can get POSIX.1-2008 free at http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/ . Thanks Bruce. I browsed it but couldn't find a C spec. Opengroup.org server restricted the URL to a constant: http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/nframe.html Depends on your browser features - you need a frame-capable browser for the URL that Bruce posted. But POSIX.1-2008 is the same as the Single Unix Specification v4 or IEEE Std 1003.1-2008. Neither gives you the C specification. Hoping for full URLs (or more) I tried: http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/mostRecentIssue.jsp?reload=truepunumber=4694974 It needed a login. I created one. IEEE harvested my address then responded: Full text access is unavailable with your individual subscription IEEE does, quite obviously, not have ISO standards. -- Matthias Andree ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 07:41:02PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: But POSIX.1-2008 is the same as the Single Unix Specification v4 or IEEE Std 1003.1-2008. Minor correction, it is SUS v3 Issue 7. Joerg ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am 16.02.2011 20:02, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 07:41:02PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: But POSIX.1-2008 is the same as the Single Unix Specification v4 or IEEE Std 1003.1-2008. Minor correction, it is SUS v3 Issue 7. No it isn't. See http://www.unix.org/version4/ieee_std.html -- Matthias Andree ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:26:04PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 16.02.2011 20:02, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 07:41:02PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: But POSIX.1-2008 is the same as the Single Unix Specification v4 or IEEE Std 1003.1-2008. Minor correction, it is SUS v3 Issue 7. No it isn't. See http://www.unix.org/version4/ieee_std.html POSIX.1-2008 is simultaneously IEEE Std 1003.1™-2008 and The Open Group technical Standard Base Specifications, Issue 7. Let's agree on that :) http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/mindex.html Joerg ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am 16.02.2011 21:13, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 08:26:04PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: Am 16.02.2011 20:02, schrieb Joerg Sonnenberger: On Wed, Feb 16, 2011 at 07:41:02PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: But POSIX.1-2008 is the same as the Single Unix Specification v4 or IEEE Std 1003.1-2008. Minor correction, it is SUS v3 Issue 7. No it isn't. See http://www.unix.org/version4/ieee_std.html POSIX.1-2008 is simultaneously IEEE Std 1003.1™-2008 and The Open Group technical Standard Base Specifications, Issue 7. Let's agree on that :) http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/mindex.html Fine. :) Note that The Open Group Technical Standard Base Specifications isn't the same as the Single Unix Specification. -- Matthias Andree ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
On Tue, 15 Feb 2011 04:19:10 +0100 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: Again you fail to post a precise complete URL for free open anonymous reference. One might wonder your involvment with open.org/ISO/IEEE. It seems registration is required for the SUS, but you can get POSIX.1-2008 free at http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/ . -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am 14.02.2011 03:41, schrieb Julian H. Stacey: Well, instead of ranting, An inadvisable epithet ! Maybe you never had the luxury of working when one could buy a slim KR, it was all one needed. Now ISO sell standards, Not all free download. For C I've only found enormous PDFs. Some downloads may not be newest/or might need logins or license or payment. Apache.org set a better example of free unobstructed hypertexted access to all versions of eg http.conf etc. Where have you been living the past two decades? It's been a not so recent development that small language cores (C, Java) are accompanied by humongous amounts of documentation for standard libraries... I understand the concerns about licensing, yet I see standards as reference material, and the SUS is available free of charge, that's about as much as I care for the current discussion. Take the political parts up with the respective entities and/or possibly the FreeBSD foundation. Using Unix C since '77, '82, I 'appreciate' C is a heavily evolved = bent language. Const as case in point: FreeBSD getopt seems to conflict with KR#2 so ... If KR #2 is supposed to be Kernighan Ritchie, The C Programming language, 2nd edition, then getopt() isn't even in my printed book's index. It would be nice to download a new C standard for reference. Is Yes. the newest definition of C free public access ? Is there a URL I never bothered to check. Check the final drafts that are getting voted becomes standard yes/no on, they are usually free. -- Matthias Andree ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
I understand the concerns about licensing, yet I see standards as reference material, ISO products are not standard when ISO restricts access by charging fees so they're not freely distributable to all individual programmers for reference in free software developer communities. Only draft ISO are freely available. FreeBSD Linux Apache RFCs etc do better than ISO, publishing de facto standards as documentation source free of charge. and the SUS is available free of charge, that's Again you fail to post a precise complete URL for free open anonymous reference. One might wonder your involvment with open.org/ISO/IEEE. Take the political parts up with the respective entities and/or possibly the FreeBSD foundation. If free source developers co-operate on de facto standards, ISO may be ignored as an obstruction. language, 2nd edition, then getopt() isn't even in my printed book's index. Yet again: The point is to find the latest specification of C language const Before considering latest getopt(). It would be nice to download a new C standard for reference. Is Yes. the newest definition of C free public access ? Is there a URL I never bothered to check. Check the final drafts that are getting voted becomes standard yes/no on, they are usually free. You Never bother to post precise URLs to list, please stop posting. A reminder for others I have found this free downloadable C spec http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/standards Is there a URL newer/ better than what I posted ? Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Mail plain text; Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64. Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am So, 13.02.2011, 13:20 schrieb Julian H. Stacey: Hi Hackers Ref.: man 3 getopt int getopt(int argc, char * const argv[], const char *optstring); Ref.: KR 2nd Ed P.211 last indent, 2nd sentence The purpose of const is to announce [objects] that may be placed in read-only memory, and perhaps to increas[e] opportunities for optimization optstring is obviously const, but I don't see that argv can calim to be const ? Hi Julian, the prototype is in line with the Single Unix Specification v4 aka IEEE Std. 1003.1-2008 (sorry no URL, I have checked my local copy, check http://www.opengroup.org/ you can access it free of charge after registering name and email address). The const basically states that the argv[] elements (i. e. the char * pointers) are const[ant], or, read another way, that getopt promises not to mess with the *pointers* but is free to modify the actual strings pointed to (with the usual constraints of not assuming they can be extended, for instance) - and I don't see the problem in that. Does that help? If not, please explain you confusion in a bit more detail. Best Matthias -- Matthias Andree ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 01:59:38PM +0100, Matthias Andree wrote: Am So, 13.02.2011, 13:20 schrieb Julian H. Stacey: Hi Hackers Ref.: man 3 getopt int getopt(int argc, char * const argv[], const char *optstring); Ref.: KR 2nd Ed P.211 last indent, 2nd sentence The purpose of const is to announce [objects] that may be placed in read-only memory, and perhaps to increas[e] opportunities for optimization const only rarely allows optimization, mostly because a declaration like const foo *p only says that the foo may not be modified via p, not that it may not be modified at all. Another important purpose of const is to allow the programmer to document what is not changed by a function, and have the compiler check this documentation. optstring is obviously const, but I don't see that argv can calim to be const ? The const basically states that the argv[] elements (i. e. the char * pointers) are const[ant], or, read another way, that getopt promises not to mess with the *pointers* but is free to modify the actual strings pointed to (with the usual constraints of not assuming they can be extended, for instance) - and I don't see the problem in that. getopt() should not modify the strings themselves either, but there are at least two reasons why the type is not const char *const argv[]: 1. Elements of argv are written into char *optarg. 2. Many programs declare main's second argument as char *argv[] which cannot be converted to const char *const [], other than via a cast. -- Jilles Tjoelker ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Hi, Thanks to all respondents, I'll re-read comments in a bit, I went searching for reference: Matthias wrote: the prototype is in line with the Single Unix Specification v4 aka IEEE Std. 1003.1-2008 (sorry no URL, I have checked my local copy, check http://www.opengroup.org/ you can access it free of charge after registering name and email address). Thanks, but I didn't find it. ( I used X Open's Search but wan't easy, (I recall fat green cardboard boxes from XOpen 20+ years back) : impression remains: opaque unattractive. Part of the attraction of C was a slim light affordable volume, 1cm thick, well written, 2 indexes, easy reading, carrying reference :-) Oh for a free modern cross reference style C definition in Asc HTML like http://apache.org has on line for httpd.conf ... Not old PDF (harder to search), or money wanting ISO, or login wanting Xopen. Or a same style KR#3 ? Prentice hall ... http://www.pearsonhighered.com/ Yawn ... http://www.google.de/search?hl=ensource=hpq=The+C+Programming+Language+Third+EditionbtnG=Google+Search http://www.google.de/search?hl=enq=The+C+Programming+Language+Fourth+Editionaq=faqi=aql=oq= http://wikipedia.org ... http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/standards no need to create a login, Click on The lastest publically available version of the standard is the combined C99 + TC1 + TC2 + TC3, WG14 N1256, dated 2007-09-07. This is a WG14 working paper, but it reflects the consolidated standard at the time of issue. get n1256.pdf ... 550 pages. P 535 (XPDF number, not visual number on page) in the alphabetic index (alpha. like the back of the C book, nice) Ref. to const type qualifier, 6.7.3 P.120 (XPDF numbering) Footnote 114) The implementation may place a const object that is not volatile in a read-only region of storage. Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Mail plain text; Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64. Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Am 13.02.2011 18:15, schrieb Julian H. Stacey: Hi, Thanks to all respondents, I'll re-read comments in a bit, I went searching for reference: Matthias wrote: the prototype is in line with the Single Unix Specification v4 aka IEEE Std. 1003.1-2008 (sorry no URL, I have checked my local copy, check http://www.opengroup.org/ you can access it free of charge after registering name and email address). Thanks, but I didn't find it. Julian, Deep link sent off-list. Start page http://www.unix.org/online.html - sorry that the opengroup.org links led you onto long-winded detours. ( I used X Open's Search but wan't easy, (I recall fat green cardboard boxes from XOpen 20+ years back) : impression remains: opaque unattractive. Part of the attraction of C was a slim light affordable volume, 1cm thick, well written, 2 indexes, easy reading, carrying reference :-) Well, instead of ranting, you might just appreciate the difference between the core language and ANSI-C (1989/1990) standard library features, and the enhanced environment that Unix provides nearly two decades later... Try gcc -std=c89 -pedantic-errors on your average Unix software for a change... :) HTH Matthias ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
On Sun, 13 Feb 2011 13:20:58 +0100 Julian H. Stacey j...@berklix.com wrote: Hi Hackers Ref.: man 3 getopt int getopt(int argc, char * const argv[], const char *optstring); Ref.: KR 2nd Ed P.211 last indent, 2nd sentence The purpose of const is to announce objjects that may be placed in read-only memory, and perhaps to increas opportunities for optimization optstring is obviously const, but I don't see that argv can calim to be const ? Did some ISO standard redefine const ? If so URL please ? (I learnt my C from KR #1 decades ago :-) Not quite what you asked for but this may help in making sense of const $ cdecl # from /usr/ports/devel/cdecl explain const char* x declare x as pointer to const char explain char * const x declare x as const pointer to char ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
On Sunday 13 February 2011 17:15:37 Julian H. Stacey wrote: Hi, Thanks to all respondents, I'll re-read comments in a bit, I went searching for reference: Matthias wrote: the prototype is in line with the Single Unix Specification v4 aka IEEE Std. 1003.1-2008 (sorry no URL, I have checked my local copy, check http://www.opengroup.org/ you can access it free of charge after registering name and email address). Thanks, but I didn't find it. ( I used X Open's Search but wan't easy, (I recall fat green cardboard boxes from XOpen 20+ years back) : impression remains: opaque unattractive. Part of the attraction of C was a slim light affordable volume, 1cm thick, well written, 2 indexes, easy reading, carrying reference :-) http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=opengroup+getopt gets results for 1003.1-2004. -- Bruce Cran ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Not quite what you asked for but this may help in making sense of const $ cdecl # from /usr/ports/devel/cdecl Thanks Bakul, nice ! Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Mail plain text; Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64. Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
Re: man 3 getopt char * const argv[] - is const wrong ?
Matthias Andree wrote: Am 13.02.2011 18:15, schrieb Julian H. Stacey: Hi, Thanks to all respondents, I'll re-read comments in a bit, I went searching for reference: Matthias wrote: the prototype is in line with the Single Unix Specification v4 aka IEEE Std. 1003.1-2008 (sorry no URL, I have checked my local copy, check http://www.opengroup.org/ you can access it free of charge after registering name and email address). Thanks, but I didn't find it. Julian, Deep link sent off-list. Thanks, so open.org quotes for getopt.html int getopt(int argc, char * const argv[], const char *optstring); but it would stll be nicer if we could read definition of C const. Well, instead of ranting, An inadvisable epithet ! Maybe you never had the luxury of working when one could buy a slim KR, it was all one needed. Now ISO sell standards, Not all free download. For C I've only found enormous PDFs. Some downloads may not be newest /or might need logins or license or payment. Apache.org set a better example of free unobstructed hypertexted access to all versions of eg http.conf etc. you might just appreciate the difference between the core language and ANSI-C (1989/1990) standard library features, and the enhanced environment that Unix provides nearly two decades later... Try gcc -std=c89 -pedantic-errors on your average Unix software for a change... :) Using Unix C since '77, '82, I 'appreciate' C is a heavily evolved = bent language. Const as case in point: FreeBSD getopt seems to conflict with KR#2 so ... It would be nice to download a new C standard for reference. Is the newest definition of C free public access ? Is there a URL newer/ better than what I posted ? We could put a URL in man gcc See Also, if allowed, a copy in /usr/share/doc/ http://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG14/www/standards Cheers, Julian -- Julian Stacey, BSD Unix Linux C Sys Eng Consultants Munich http://berklix.com Mail plain text; Not quoted-printable, Not HTML, Not base 64. Reply below text sections not at top, to avoid breaking cumulative context. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org
