Add note to FAQ about fgets() question
It is now noted that in some cases the fix can be as simple as adding a macro so that the entry looks almost identical to the original. I gave an example of 1988/reddy where all that had to be added was a redefinition of gets.
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
790115dd1c
commit
1017f02589
1 file changed
+5
@@ -106,6 +106,10 @@ have mainly not been touched except one that has had the buffer size increased
|
||||
(which could be done for others that are not possible to change to `fgets()` but
|
||||
this has not been done).
|
||||
|
||||
Some entries can be made to look almost identical to the original entry. For
|
||||
instance the fix to [1988/reddy](1988/reddy/README.md) required only a single
|
||||
`#define` be added.
|
||||
|
||||
In the future we, the judges, would prefer that entries use `fgets()` to prevent
|
||||
these problems.
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -113,6 +117,7 @@ NOTE: due to 'compatibility reasons' `fgets()` stores the newline and `gets()`
|
||||
does not. We're not sure how this is compatibility but either way it can cause a
|
||||
problem and it is this that has complicated some fixes.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
## Q: I cannot get entry XYZZY from year 19xx to compile!
|
||||
|
||||
Some winners, particularly winners from long ago, no longer compile on more
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user