Re: Structure Pointer
- From: Keith Thompson <kst-u@xxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 17:40:26 -0800
Ben Pfaff <blp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Keith Thompson <kst-u@xxxxxxx> writes:
"santosh" <santosh.k83@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
He (Ken) said that in jest. There're far more cryptic calls like brk.
But "break" is a keyword.
As a side note, in the 6th Edition kernel, brk was named sbreak,
with this comment above it:
bad planning: "break" is a dirty word in C.
Modern Unixish systems have both brk() and sbrk().
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@xxxxxxx <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Structure Pointer
- From: Richard Tobin
- Re: Structure Pointer
- References:
- Structure Pointer
- From: RAKHE
- Re: Structure Pointer
- From: jaysome
- Re: Structure Pointer
- From: u plz
- Re: Structure Pointer
- From: santosh
- Re: Structure Pointer
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: Structure Pointer
- From: Ben Pfaff
- Structure Pointer
- Prev by Date: Re: #include behavior
- Next by Date: Re: [OT] Structure Pointer
- Previous by thread: Re: Structure Pointer
- Next by thread: Re: Structure Pointer
- Index(es):