Subject: Re: atoll() query From: Tim Van Holder To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com In-Reply-To: <000901c27ff4$974bcbf0$0100a8c0@p4> References: <000901c27ff4$974bcbf0$0100a8c0 AT p4> Content-Type: text/plain Organization: Message-Id: <1035972385.13331.9.camel@leeloo> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.1.2 (Preview Release) Date: 30 Oct 2002 11:06:25 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Wed, 2002-10-30 at 10:12, Andrew Cottrell wrote: > I don't have a copy of the C99 standard to see if it should be in there. Can > someone let me know if it should be and I will add it to the list of items > to be done for the 2.04 release if it should be in there. man atoi has this to say about atoi/atol/atoq/atoll: CONFORMING TO SVID 3, POSIX.1, BSD 4.3, ISO/IEC 9899. ISO/IEC 9899:1990 (C89) and POSIX.1 (1996 edition) include the functions atoi() and atol() only; C99 adds the function atoll(). Note: the atoq above is an obsolete alias for atoll that was present in libc5. Not sure if we need/want to support that as well. -- Tim Van Holder