> -Original Message-
> From: Christopher Faylor [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 03:42:14PM +0100, Werner Tuchan wrote:
> >> Weird. The bytes after EOF are a mixture of NULs and 0xc0. Is 0xc0
> >> of special significance in Windows? Is your version of cygwin the
AFAIR
Christopher Faylor wrote:-
> Can I ask why we'd be reading beyond EOF? Is it guaranteed that bytes beyond
> EOF will be zero on UNIX?
This was discussed in September (see thread in gcc@ entitled "Bumming
cycles out of parse_identifier"). It was decided that all known
current Unix implementatio
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 03:42:14PM +0100, Werner Tuchan wrote:
>> Weird. The bytes after EOF are a mixture of NULs and 0xc0. Is 0xc0
>> of special significance in Windows? Is your version of cygwin the
>> latest? I recall some talk about mmap bugs in cygwin.
>
>The cygwin version is pretty rec
3 matches
Mail list logo