proper semi-portable use of signal()?

[Norman Diamond]

In article <3228 at charon.cwi.nl> guido at cwi.nl (Guido van Rossum) writes:

>Therefore I believe my declaration is compatible with the standard,

It was; though the combination of your declaration with the contents
of your <signal.h> (which was not provided by your processor, gcc)
yielded an invalid program.

>while the <signal.h> in question (provided by SGI) is not.

Essentially true.  The <signal.h> that was provided to you by SGI
cannot really be part of a standard-conforming implementation.
(Wierd hacks could be made to the compiler in order to get around
this, but it's not worth worrying about.)

>Any other opinions?

If you want a standard-conforming processor, you should install a
complete standard-conforming processor, not just half of one.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond at tkov50.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.