Re: Strange argc check in stable snapshot

Quoting [e-mail], on Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 03:17:30AM +0900:
> Sam wrote:
> >Wrote "Berger, Daniel" <[e-mail]>, on Thu, Feb 24, 2005 at 
> >01:04:25AM +0900:
> >
> >>>>Right.  It is unnecessary check.  Thank you.
> >>>
> >>>Maybe a good idea nonetheless. It might catch a bug someday. Nothing 
> >>>*guarantees* that argc is nonnegative, not even for main().
                       ^^^^                     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> >
> >If you don't trust your runtime, nothing is guaranteed... and you are
> >on a slippery slope to insanity.
> 
> The argument value in question (in array.c) is not set by the runtime. 

The argc I was referring to was the one the previous post, where the
poster claimed argc could be negative when passed to main. Was that not
clear?

> It just has the same name. See my earlier post for why it has nothing to 
> do with trusting the runtime.

You aren't seriously suggesting that because main() can be called in other
ways than by the runtime, that you should check argc is what the runtime
promises?

If so, I would say you are on that slippery slope I referred to, but
with a toboggan!

Cheers,
Sam