Subject:	Re: atoll() query
From:	Tim Van Holder <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
In-Reply-To:	<000901c27ff4$974bcbf0$0100a8c0@p4>
References:	<000901c27ff4$974bcbf0$0100a8c0 AT p4>
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
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

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 <tim DOT van DOT holder AT pandora DOT be>

- Raw text -