Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #25865

Re: code

Show all headers | View raw

"Bill Cunningham" wrote:

> Keith Thompson wrote:
>> "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:
>>> Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>>> There are four big things wrong here.
>>>>
>>>> (1) The termination condition of the loop is wrong.  It is always
>>>> better, when using scanf and friends, to loop while the function
>>>> reports success.  Don't loop while it isn't something you don't
>>>> want, loop while it what you do want.  In this case, fscanf will
>>>> report 1 if it reads one number so loop while the result is one.
>>>
>>>     Didn't know that. ok. Does it only return 0 or 1? Or the number
>>> of bytes read like fread? That's what I'm trying to treat this like.
>>
>> You'll find the answer to that question in the documentation for
>> fscanf.  Read it.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>>>     I have misused fscanf because I don't understand the *scanfs. I
>>> thought it would return like fread. Bytes.
>>
>> Why would you think that?  Why would you write a call to fscanf
>> without reading the documentation, which clearly tells you what it
>> returns?
>>
>> As I've advised you multiple times before, you should *never* write
>> a call to a C function without first reading and understanding the
>> documentation for that function.
>>
>> [...]
>
>    I did read the man pages but evedently didn't understand them. The man 
> page said fscanf returns EOF thus it is in my code. EOF on error and end 
> of file the way I understand it.

Your man page doesn't say that, now does it?

Type in *exactly* what K&R say, no digressions or observations or thoughts 
or feelings by you, and we will help you read it word by word. 

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-02 22:50 -0400
  Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-02 22:53 -0400
  Re: code Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2012-09-02 21:21 -0700
  Re: code Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-02 22:23 -0700
    Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 06:56 -0400
  Re: code Angel <angel+news@spamcop.net> - 2012-09-03 07:47 +0000
  Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-03 11:51 +0100
    Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 09:02 -0400
      Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-03 15:02 +0100
        Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-03 17:20 +0100
        Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 14:33 -0400
    Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 14:48 -0400
      Re: code Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-03 13:11 -0700
        Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 17:41 -0400
          Re: code Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-03 14:53 -0700
            Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-03 23:10 +0100
          Re: code "osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2012-09-03 16:56 -0500
            Re: code Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-09-03 18:27 -0700
        Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 17:50 -0400
          Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 17:54 -0400
            Re: code Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2012-09-03 15:12 -0700
            Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-03 23:23 +0100
              Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 18:42 -0400
                Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 19:11 -0400
                Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-04 00:16 +0100
                Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 20:01 -0400
                Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-04 02:07 +0100
                Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-03 21:17 -0400
                Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-04 02:24 +0100
                Re: code Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2012-09-03 20:55 -0700
                Re: code Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-09-04 11:16 +0100
              Re: code Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-09-04 14:09 -0400
          Re: code Kenneth Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2012-09-04 14:07 -0400
            Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 18:35 -0400
              Re: code Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2012-09-04 18:49 -0500
                Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 20:56 -0400
                Re: code "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2012-09-04 22:05 -0400

csiph-web