Re: atoi return
- From: CBFalconer <cbfalconer@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2008 09:59:13 -0400
Richard Heathfield wrote:
CBFalconer said:
Bill Cunningham wrote:
"Keith Thompson" <kst-u@xxxxxxx> wrote in message... snip ...
Even worse, if atoi() is given a string that represents a number
that's too big to hold in an int, it invokes undefined behavior.
For example, there's no telling what atoi("99999999999999999999")
will do; it could crash your program or worse.
I see. Must be a left over dinosaur like gets().
No. gets() is just unsafe regardless. atoi() can be used safely,
but why bother when you have strtol available.
In other words, it's a left over dinosaur. And so is gets().
Therefore, it's a left over dinosaur like gets(). Which is what he
said.
Not so. gets should never appear in any code. atoi can. One
objective of the C standard is to preserve the viability of old
code.
I can also see various other differences between gets and atoi. So
the above comment is simply a waste of time.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: atoi return
- From: Richard Heathfield
- Re: atoi return
- From: vippstar
- Re: atoi return
- References:
- atoi return
- From: Bill Cunningham
- Re: atoi return
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: atoi return
- From: Bill Cunningham
- Re: atoi return
- From: Keith Thompson
- Re: atoi return
- From: Bill Cunningham
- Re: atoi return
- From: CBFalconer
- Re: atoi return
- From: Richard Heathfield
- atoi return
- Prev by Date: sexy earnings 5000 15000 permonth for life time earnmore
- Next by Date: Real story USA
- Previous by thread: Re: atoi return
- Next by thread: Re: atoi return
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|