On 10-Apr-98, 18:00 (CDT), Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I have looked at the standards to shed some liight on this > subject, and I failt to see any statements that a second flose is > cause for undefined behaviour, asuming you meant the technical term > ``undefined'' when you say "not defined".
My copy of the standard is at work, but I think there's a statement near the beginning of the <stdio.h> section that says calling any of the I/O functions with an invalid FILE * is causes undefined behaviour. If anybody really cares, I'll look Monday. > >> A double fclose is just as bad as a double free() and is not a > >> library error should it fault or corrupt memory. > > Hola! Corupting memory is not acceptable behaviour! (Unless > you document this) Sure it is. Go read the definition of "undefined behaviour" again -- "this standard imposes no requirment". It can corrupt memory, re-format your hard disk, or make monkeys fly out of your nose; all of these are ISO C compliant. Hmmm, I suppose anything further should go to comp.std.c. steve -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
