Ron Martin wrote: > > > > if (!buf || !buf2) > > > > You really only need to check for (!*buf2) since if there is no first > > arg then there obviously isn't any second arg. > > > > Regards, Peter > > But then there's the situation where there is a first arg, but no second > arg: "dig n" In which case buf2 will still be empty and so a check for (!*buf2) will return true, just like you want. Regards, Peter -- +---------------------------------------------------------------+ | FAQ: http://qsilver.queensu.ca/~fletchra/Circle/list-faq.html | | Archives: http://post.queensu.ca/listserv/wwwarch/circle.html | +---------------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/03/01 PST