Re: tolower()/islower() and char

[John Nemeth <jnemeth%cue.bc.ca@localhost>]

On Jan 14,  7:46, Mouse wrote:
}
} > The standard is explicit that the argument must be EOF or an unsigned
} > char.  There is no way to support both true 8bit locales and
} > magically fix this.
} 
} No way for ctype.h to do so independent of the rest of the system.  But
} it's not at all hard to fix it from a libc design perspective; you just
} need to choose a value for EOF that is out of range for signed char.
} 
} > '\xff' in Latin1 is a letter for example and EOF is not.
} 
} But nothing says (signed char)'\xff' == EOF.
} 
} Nothing except existing practice, that is; the C spec chose (rightly,
} IMO) to support existing practice in this regard.
} 
} > I'm still shocked by how many developers have been using C for 20
} > years and still manage to not use ctype.h correctly...
} 
} I've seen worse.  I've even corresponded with someone holding the
} curious delusion that uncast NULL was suitable as a stdarg pointer

     Anybody remember PR 34632, where a PHP developer was seriously
arguing that they should be able to pass any sort of garbage to a
ctype function and they should not get a segfault as a result?

} argument, apparently believing that all pointer types had to be
} sufficiently similar, at least in an argument list, that this was
} possible.
} 
} /~\ The ASCII				  Mouse
} \ / Ribbon Campaign
}  X  Against HTML		mouse%rodents-montreal.org@localhost
} / \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
}-- End of excerpt from Mouse