RI> code, Visual C zero's out the FILE pointer after a fclose() and any
TS>I cannot imagine that. The prototype is "int fclose(FILE 
TS>*)", so how should it be possible to zero the pointer 
TS>itself? To do what you tell here, it would have to be 
TS>something like "int fclose(FILE **)".

If fclose() was declared in the following way it would be compatible with
all existing code and zero the pointer if compiled in C++: #ifdef
__CPLUS_PLUS
int fclose(FILE *&);
#else
int fclose(FILE *);
#endif

 RI>  CSet just leaves the FILE pointer a mess which causes a trap on
 RI> fprintf().
TS>This is up to the compiler implementors.

 RI> Is there a way to really kill a process/session?
TS>Huh? Is this related to the same problem?

   It appears to be impossible to kill an OS/2 program if it does certain
bad things.  EG  If one thread is sleeping on a resource such as a
semaphore and the thread which is supposed to wake it has exited...

   If someone knows how to kill such a program then please tell me.

  cya
___
 X MR/2 2.0 NR X Are you using Windows, or is that just an XT?

--- Maximus/2 2.02