Subject: Re: lib/19638: isalpha (3) bug
To: Mike Cheponis <mac@Wireless.Com>
From: Nathan J. Williams <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 01/03/2003 17:38:52
Mike Cheponis <mac@Wireless.Com> writes:
> On Fri, 3 Jan 2003, Dave Sainty wrote:
> > > HOWEVER, the behavior on NetBSD is still wrong, I maintain. Here's my
> > > argument:
> > This is hardly a real-world example though!
> Ahh, who's to say it isn't "real-world"? I found this NetBSD bug while
> using srandom() and random().
> The NetBSD behaviour is wrong.
Wrong according to who besides you? POXIX and SUSv3 agree that using
values outside of the range of unsigned char + EOF results in
I think you are wrong to believe that the C parameter list is the
last word in determining what set of values are valid input.