delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
Date: | Mon, 13 Jan 2003 21:25:58 +0300 |
From: | "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> |
Sender: | halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il |
To: | djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com |
Message-Id: | <3405-Mon13Jan2003212557+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> |
X-Mailer: | emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 |
In-reply-to: | <3E22D46D.116FDB95@phekda.freeserve.co.uk> (message from Richard |
Dawe on Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:59:57 +0000) | |
Subject: | Re: FILENAME_MAX - does it include a nul terminator? |
References: | <3E22D46D DOT 116FDB95 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> |
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 |
> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2003 14:59:57 +0000 > From: Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> > > "FILENAME_MAX which expands to an integer constant expression that is the size > needed for an array of char large enough to hold the longest file name string > that the implementation guarantees can be opened;" > > So it seems that FILENAME_MAX does include the nul terminator. You are right, FILENAME_MAX does include the space for the null terminator. > PATH_MAX also includes space for the terminator. I haven't looked at uses of > that, but I suspect a similar problem may exist. For PATH_MAX, this doesn't really matter, since our PATH_MAX has the value of 512, way more than any platform we support needs...
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |