Date: Fri, 3 May 1996 11:36:26 -0700 (MST) From: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org> To: rpt@miles.sso.loral.com (Richard Toren) Cc: freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: stdio problem Message-ID: <199605031836.LAA14591@phaeton.artisoft.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960503073715.11811A-100000@miles> from "Richard Toren" at May 3, 96 07:48:50 am
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> The "assumption" that 'fd 0 == stdin at entry to main()' is no longer
> valid!
>
> In the classes I teach here at work, this is one of the examples I use
> about how old shortcuts/standards make for non-portable code and insidious
> bugs.
>
> I learned this from first-hand experience where fileno(stdin) did not
> equal 0 but rather 1. And this was a program started from the standard
> csh command line.
>
> This happens when a C++ static initializer procedure opens a file before
> the crt0.o (or it's C++ equivelant) has yet run. In this case,
> std{in,out,err} are fds n+0, n+1, n+2.
Hmmmm...
I've got to argue that this could only result from bad code for dealing
with static initializers.
What about a static initializer that operates on stdio? Is this
now deemed illegal?
fd's 0, 1, and 2 come from the exec, not from the crt0.o, in any case.
Terry Lambert
terry@lambert.org
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199605031836.LAA14591>