On Wednesday 08 September 2010 01:40:00 Dan Fandrich wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Dan Fandrich <[email protected]>
> ---
>  coreutils/ls.c  |    4 ++--
>  coreutils/tee.c |    8 ++++----
>  shell/ash.c     |    6 ++++--
>  3 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

According to c99:

  http://busybox.net/~landley/c99-draft.html#7.19.7.8

  #2

  The putc function is equivalent to fputc, except that if it is implemented
  as a macro, it may evaluate stream more than once, so that argument should
  never be an expression with side effects.

So why not just convert the putc() calls to fputc() instead of rewriting 
unrelated code?

Rob
-- 
GPLv3: as worthy a successor as The Phantom Menace, as timely as Duke Nukem 
Forever, and as welcome as New Coke.
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to