Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author
Re: zsh-3.0.2 repacked
- X-seq: zsh-workers 2603
- From: Richard Coleman <coleman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: Wolfgang Hukriede <whukriede@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: zsh-3.0.2 repacked
- Date: Thu, 19 Dec 1996 20:22:33 -0500
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 20 Dec 1996 01:38:39 +0100." <199612200038.BAA18599@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> I'm sorry, but definitely there's no such alleged bug in the NeXTStep libc.
> Setting BAUD to zero fixes the jumping movement of the cursor, nothing else,
> the screen output is as fast/slow as without setting BAUD.
>
> Then, after:
>
> setvbuf(shout, NULL, _IOFBF, 0);
>
> shout->_bufsiz gives ZERO, as well as shout->_base still is ZERO, in other
> words, shout is unbuffered. I cannot imagine this should be different with
> other libc's. Have you actually checked this?
>
> Also, to fix that all,
>
> setvbuf(shout, NULL, _IOFBF, BUFSIZ);
>
> is totally sufficient, and has the advantage, that the buffer only is
> allocated if shout is actually used. (Further: imo there's really no need for
> conditional compilation here.).
This is definitely a bug. If second argument is NULL, and the mode is
either _IOFBF (fully buffered) or _IOLBF (line buffered), then the libc
should ignore the fourth argument and allocate a buffer of the appropriate
length. This is according to Steven's "Advanced Programming in the Unix
Environment".
rc
Messages sorted by:
Reverse Date,
Date,
Thread,
Author