Re: lsearch.c

2014-07-17 Thread Matthew Dempsky
On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 8:05 PM, patrick keshishian wrote: > Silly even though, the description of lsearch says it will modify > ("it shall be added at the end of") the table, for which "base > argument points to the first element"? Ah, I didn't pay close attention to the definition and assumed i

Re: lsearch.c

2014-07-17 Thread patrick keshishian
;>> >>> On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 5:38 PM, enh wrote: >>> > POSIX says lsearch's 'base' is void*, not const void*. >>> > >>> > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/lsearch.html >>> > >>> > openbsd gets this wrong in search.h and lsearch.c. (but lfind is >>> > correct --- that should be const void*.) >>> > >>> > -e >>> > > >

Re: lsearch.c

2014-07-17 Thread Matthew Dempsky
h's 'base' is void*, not const void*. >> > >> > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/lsearch.html >> > >> > openbsd gets this wrong in search.h and lsearch.c. (but lfind is >> > correct --- that should be const void*.) >> > >> > -e >> >

Re: lsearch.c

2014-07-17 Thread Matthew Dempsky
at 5:38 PM, enh wrote: > POSIX says lsearch's 'base' is void*, not const void*. > > http://pubs.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/9699919799/functions/lsearch.html > > openbsd gets this wrong in search.h and lsearch.c. (but lfind is > correct --- that should be const void*.) > > -e >