Defect Report #052

Submission Date: 21 Mar 93
Submittor: Project Editor (P.J. Plauger)
Source: Paul Edwards
Question 1
In subclause, page 172, the example is not strictly conforming. The mktime return is compared against -1 instead of (time_t)-1, which could cause a problem with a strictly conforming implementation.
In subclause, page 172, line 16, change:
if (mktime(&time_str) == -1)
if (mktime(&time_str) == (time_t)-1)
Question 2
Index entry for static lists subclause instead of subclause
In the index, page 217, change:
static storage-class specifier,,, 6.5.1, 6.7
static storage-class specifier,,, 6.5.1, 6.7
Question 3
Footnote 1, page 1, says that the C Standard comes with a Rationale; it doesn't.
The footnote actually states, in part, ``It is accompanied by a Rationale document that explains ...'' And indeed, the C Standard was accompanied by such a document throughout its approval process. ISO, unfortunately, has elected not to distribute the Rationale with the C Standard. ``Accompanied by'' does not promise ``comes with'' when you buy the C Standard.
Previous Defect Report < - > Next Defect Report