Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!seismo!ut-sally!husc6!think!ames!ucbcad!ucbvax!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!oliveb!felix!ccicpg!turnkey!root
From: root@turnkey.UUCP (The Super User)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Curses quirk (bug?)
Message-ID: <129@turnkey.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 9-Jul-87 20:15:01 EDT
Article-I.D.: turnkey.129
Posted: Thu Jul  9 20:15:01 1987
Date-Received: Mon, 13-Jul-87 03:48:51 EDT
References: <8180@brl-adm.ARPA>
Organization: Turnkey Computer Consultants, Costa Mesa, CA
Lines: 23
Summary: Perplexing problem! Give us more detail.

In article <8180@brl-adm.ARPA>, jfjr@mitre-bedford.arpa writes:
> 
>   I am writing something that uses curses (ultrix on vax 8600).
> The code I am writing calls a function that returns a string
> and then calls curses to put this on the screen  I am only using
> stdscr and curscr, no intricate windows etc. Addstr() gave 
> me garbage ( it only printed the first letter of the string
>  returned by the function). Printw()
> worked fine.  Why??

This is very odd since both addstr() and printw() make use of the common
function addch(). I have worked with both these functions (under Xenix)
and have not noticed any problem. Could there be any peculiarity of the
string your function returns that might cause addstr() a problem but
which the formatting of printw() gets around? Why don't you give a bit
more detail of the code which may shed some light on things. I would be
interested in hearing about it since I have had my share of head-scratching
with curses code as well.

Best regards,
Jack Vogel, Turnkey Computer Consultants
--
uucp: ...seismo!uunet!ccicpg!turnkey!root