platform specific API or C standard API

[George2]

Hello everyone,
Are there any official site to check whether an API (like tolower or
toLower) is platform specific API (e.g. Microsoft platform specific,
Linux specific) or C common standard API?
thanks in advance,
George

[Ian Collins]

George2 wrote:

Hello everyone,

Are there any official site to check whether an API (like tolower or
toLower) is platform specific API (e.g. Microsoft platform specific,
Linux specific) or C common standard API?

Look it up in the standard!

--
Ian Collins.

[Flash Gordon]

Ian Collins wrote, On 12/11/07 08:04:

George2 wrote:

>Hello everyone,

Are there any official site to check whether an API (like tolower or
toLower) is platform specific API (e.g. Microsoft platform specific,
Linux specific) or C common standard API?

Look it up in the standard!

You can find links to drafts of the standard at
http://clc-wiki.net/wiki/c_standard

Also a good text book such as K&R2 (see the bibliography of the FAQ at
http://c-faq.com/ )

If you have tried but cannot find the answer then you can ask here and
people will tell you whether a function is a standard C function or not.
--
Flash Gordon

[John Bode]

On Nov 12, 2:01 am, George2 <george4acade.. [e-mail] e:

Hello everyone,

Are there any official site to check whether an API (like tolower or
toLower) is platform specific API (e.g. Microsoft platform specific,
Linux specific) or C common standard API?

thanks in advance,
George

Any good, authoritative C reference (such as Kernighan & Ritchie's
"The C Programming Language" or Harbison & Steele's "C: A Reference
Manual" or P.J. Plauger's "The C Standard Library") will contain a
listing of all the C standard library functions; so, if you come
across a library call that isn't described in any of those references,
it's platform-specific.

[dj3vande]

In article <JK************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

>dj******@csclu b.uwaterloo.ca. invalid wrote:

>In article <w5************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

[...]

>>In the case of Microsoft, their lower-case API's, all have an underscore
prefix, so 'tolower' would be named '_tolower' by M$. Turn on the
compiler switch /Za, to get compiler in conforming mode.

Incorrect.

Then please name a lower-case Microsoft specific API, which doesn't have
underscore prefix. Since 'tolower' hasn't, this shows OP by a glance,
that it's a C standard function.

Uhh... what? You claimed that Microsoft prefixes lower-case symbols
with a '_', and presented tolower as an example. Which is incorrect.

Perhaps your comment would have been clearer if you had used an example
of a lower-case symbol that does fit the pattern you're describing.
dave

[Tor Rustad]

dj******@csclub .uwaterloo.ca.i nvalid wrote:

In article <w5************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

[...]

>In the case of Microsoft, their lower-case API's, all have an underscore
prefix, so 'tolower' would be named '_tolower' by M$. Turn on the
compiler switch /Za, to get compiler in conforming mode.

Incorrect.

Then please name a lower-case Microsoft specific API, which doesn't have
underscore prefix. Since 'tolower' hasn't, this shows OP by a glance,
that it's a C standard function.

FYI, the default VC++ 6.0 mode, isn't the C conforming mode:

cl /?
Microsoft (R) 32-bit C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 12.00.8168 for 80x86
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corp 1984-1998. All rights reserved.

C/C++ COMPILER OPTIONS
....

/Za disable extensions (implies /Op)

This compiles and runs perfectly fine with the default invocation of
MSVC6:
--------
#include <ctype.h>
#include <stdio.h>

int main(void)
{
printf("tolower ('a'): %c\n",tolower(' a'));
printf("tolower ('A'): %c\n",tolower(' A'));

return 0;
}

So? tolower() isn't a M$ specific function.

--
Tor <bw****@wvtqvm. vw | tr i-za-h a-z>

[Kenny McCormack]

In article <fh**********@r umours.uwaterlo o.ca>,
<dj******@csclu b.uwaterloo.ca. invalidwrote:
....

>>In the case of Microsoft, their lower-case API's, all have an underscore
prefix, so 'tolower' would be named '_tolower' by M$. Turn on the
compiler switch /Za, to get compiler in conforming mode.

Incorrect.
This compiles and runs perfectly fine with the default invocation of
MSVC6:

I think you misunderstand. In the patois of this NG, the phrase:
"to get compiler in conforming mode" means "cripple your compiler so
that only stricting conforming programs can be compiled". It doesn't
mean anything remotely resembling "enhance your compiler's performance
so that ...".

[Tor Rustad]

dj******@csclub .uwaterloo.ca.i nvalid wrote:

In article <JK************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

>dj******@csclub .uwaterloo.ca.i nvalid wrote:

>>In article <w5************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

[...]

>>>In the case of Microsoft, their lower-case API's, all have an underscore
prefix, so 'tolower' would be named '_tolower' by M$. Turn on the
compiler switch /Za, to get compiler in conforming mode.
Incorrect.

Then please name a lower-case Microsoft specific API, which doesn't have
underscore prefix. Since 'tolower' hasn't, this shows OP by a glance,
that it's a C standard function.

Uhh... what? You claimed that Microsoft prefixes lower-case symbols
with a '_',

No, I said *their* lower-case API's. So context here was M$ specific API's.

and presented tolower as an example. Which is incorrect.

Well, it was OP's example. I just tried to tell OP about the M$ naming
conventions relevant for his case.

Perhaps your comment would have been clearer if you had used an example
of a lower-case symbol that does fit the pattern you're describing.

Perhaps, if some non-native speaker of English is unclear, it's better
to ask for a clarification, before jumping to some silly conclusion.

--
Tor <bw****@wvtqvm. vw | tr i-za-h a-z>

[jaysome]

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 20:38:07 +0100, Tor Rustad
<to********@hot mail.comwrote:

>dj******@csclu b.uwaterloo.ca. invalid wrote:

>In article <w5************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

[...]

>>In the case of Microsoft, their lower-case API's, all have an underscore
prefix, so 'tolower' would be named '_tolower' by M$. Turn on the
compiler switch /Za, to get compiler in conforming mode.

Incorrect.

Then please name a lower-case Microsoft specific API, which doesn't have
underscore prefix.

strlwr, strnset, strrev, etc., in <string.h>?

--
jay

[Tor Rustad]

jaysome wrote:

On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 20:38:07 +0100, Tor Rustad
<to********@hot mail.comwrote:

>dj******@csclub .uwaterloo.ca.i nvalid wrote:

>>In article <w5************ *********@telen or.com>,
Tor Rustad <to********@hot mail.comwrote:

[...]

>>>In the case of Microsoft, their lower-case API's, all have an underscore
prefix, so 'tolower' would be named '_tolower' by M$. Turn on the
compiler switch /Za, to get compiler in conforming mode.
Incorrect.

Then please name a lower-case Microsoft specific API, which doesn't have
underscore prefix.

strlwr, strnset, strrev, etc., in <string.h>?

Don't think so, those functions should not available when __STDC__ is
defined.

--
Tor <bw****@wvtqvm. vw | tr i-za-h a-z>