Date: Sun, 12 Dec 1999 13:51:11 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Gisle Vanem <giva AT bryggen DOT bgnett DOT no>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: select() error
In-Reply-To: <Pine.UW2.3.95.991210015213.27120A-100000@bryggen.bgnett.no>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.991212135034.19096O-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Fri, 10 Dec 1999, Gisle Vanem wrote:

> I think there is a bug in ./src/libc/compat/time/select.c. The code
> assumes that select() is always called with a bitset equal to the size 
> of 'fd_set'.

Of course, it is.  But why are you calling this ``a bug''?  What is
buggy about a function that expects to get the arguments exactly as
specified by its prototype?

> But I've seen code that supports bitset of arbitrary size (infact
> from 1 to unlimited size).  Here the size of 'read' bitset is just 
> large enough to hold the 'fds' of interest.

I think such code is buggy, and should be corrected.  Doesn't GCC
complain when you compile such code?