Mail Archives: djgpp-workers/1996/04/14/01:46:52
On Thu, 11 Apr 1996, Charles Marslett wrote:
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> If this is correct, _STAT_EXECBIT should be renamed -- a name like that
> implies a single bit is set in the equate, in which case the two lines
> of code do exactly the same thing. If it is a multibit equate, it should
> be named something like _STAT_EXECSELECT so as to not imply a single bit
> value (now I gotta go look at the definition, like I shouda done first... :-).
That constant is internal to the code of `stat' (as you probably already
know if you looked it up in the sources), so it can bear any meaning
that's good enough for whoever wrote that code. The reason why it is
called `BIT' is that it means that the excute permission bit in the stat
structure should be computed.
- Raw text -