|
From: | Bob Friesenhahn |
Subject: | Re: use of -fno-common on Darwin |
Date: | Mon, 9 Jan 2006 16:50:47 -0600 (CST) |
On Mon, 9 Jan 2006, Paul Eggert wrote:
"Peter O'Gorman" <address@hidden> writes:getprogname(3), if it exists, can be used as well as other alternatives (e.g. argv[0]).Thanks, I wasn't aware of the BSD getprogname until now. How about this proposal? * Change the progname module to use the BSD getprogname naming convention. No sense reinventing the wheel. That way, programs can simply use the system-defined functions on BSD. * Rewrite the other gnulib code to use the new convention. * Ask gnulib users to switch to the new convention.
I was also not aware of BSD getprogname until now but I like its definition. It looks like something useful to standardize on. The problem with argv[0] is that it may not be accessible from within a library, and might not be usefully defined, so getprogname() is superior for the purpose of obtaining the program name.
Bob ====================================== Bob Friesenhahn address@hidden, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/ GraphicsMagick Maintainer, http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |