Derek Price writes: > > Okay, looking at that in C89 now, but just out of curiosity, if argv > needs to be NULL terminated, what's the point of argc?
I believe it was added for convenience back in the dark ages. All the Unix exec functions require a null-terminated argument list (and don't have an explicit argument count), so argv has naturally always been null terminated. (And the C Standard codified that behavior: at program startup, argv[argc] is required to be null.) -Larry Jones I don't think that question was very hypothetical at all. -- Calvin _______________________________________________ Bug-cvs mailing list Bug-cvs@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-cvs
