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.