Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!ginosko!uunet!auspex!guy From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) Newsgroups: comp.unix.questions Subject: Re: SunOS: 1; portability: 0 Message-ID: <2500@auspex.auspex.com> Date: 26 Sep 89 00:32:00 GMT References: <880@cirrusl.UUCP> <11142@smoke.BRL.MIL> <892@cirrusl.UUCP> Reply-To: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris) Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara Lines: 8 >Note 1. Actually, I'm not fully convinced that signal handlers should >return void rather than int. Letting them return int allows a future >extension to signal handlers so that they *can* return a value. And allows all programs written not to have the handler for the signals in question to fall apart in a million pieces once the signal mechanism is modified to expect a return value. Yes, signal handlers should return void rather than int.