Sender:	nate AT cartsys DOT com
Message-ID:	<370E4B9D.D6A2904D@cartsys.com>
Date:	Fri, 09 Apr 1999 11:49:01 -0700
From:	Nate Eldredge <nate AT cartsys DOT com>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.08 [en] (X11; I; Linux 2.2.5 i586)
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: fflush question
References:	<199904082241 DOT SAA27805 AT mccoy2 DOT ECE DOT McGill DOT CA> <370E4124 DOT D6F9387B AT cartsys DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Nate Eldredge wrote:
> 
> Alain Magloire wrote:
> 
> > > So do these systems have serious bugs in scanf, or is there a subtle bug
> > > in the test that I missed?
> >
> > Yes. In your second test your doing 2 fscanf(), and the printf()
> > is missing an argument.  I run this On Solaris, QNX, SunOS with
> > no problems .i.e no need for fsync().
> 
> Duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuh.  Wow, do I feel dumb.
> 
> Okay, new results are on their way, this time without the benefit of
> pseudocode. :)

Yep, all works as expected on SGI and Sun.
-- 

Nate Eldredge
nate AT cartsys DOT com

- Raw text -