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