chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) (12/16/88)
In article <9189@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes: >... In fact, Berkeley broke the non-null case too by changing >it from pointing to an int to pointing to a "union wait". It should be >a pointer-to-int. For once, I actually agree with Doug Gwyn :-) . The 4.3BSD-tahoe <sys/wait.h> is full of `#ifdef's to determine the byte order for a `union wait'. This is grotesque and---perhaps worse--- insufficient, as a `wait' object contains bitfields as well, and while the ifdef's can account for byte order differences, they do not now do so for bit order differences. Were one to add those, the file would become yet more grotesque. Instead, the various operations that are now bit fields should be done with function-like macros. -- In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci Dept (+1 301 454 7163) Domain: chris@mimsy.umd.edu Path: uunet!mimsy!chris