Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- From: roberson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Walter Roberson)
- Date: Thu, 31 Jul 2008 08:32:03 +0000 (UTC)
In article <slrng92sja.uh7.nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Antoninus Twink <nospam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 30 Jul 2008 at 23:44, vippstar@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
On Jul 31, 1:30 am, Richie Kernagan <ho...@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The parameters to fread size and count are both size_t ie 64 bits. Even
so the call fails when the size arg is greater than 4GB (ie exceeds 32
bit unsigned value).
So what? fread can succeed or fail.
Great. Just great.
When an implementation deviates by a tiny fraction from the golden
tablets of The Standard, the people here come down on it like a ton of
bricks. But as long as it obeys the letter of the law, noone minds how
poor the quality of implementation might be.
The quality of any particular implementation is relevant to
newsgroups that deal with that particular implementation, and not
relevant to comp.lang.c, which deals with the C language rather than
with implementations.
--
"To burn always with this hard, gem-like flame, to maintain this
ecstasy, is success in life." -- Walter Pater
.
- References:
- Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- From: vippstar
- Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- From: Antoninus Twink
- Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- Prev by Date: Re: $ & _
- Next by Date: Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- Previous by thread: Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- Next by thread: Re: FREAD fails on files >4GB
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|