PE> If you want to document that your program is broken, yes, that makes a

FA> You mean i've got a "broken" copy of Msged ? 

PE> You are correct, Msged is not a strictly conforming C 
PE> program. It's miles from it in fact.  Try complaining about 
PE> Tobruk instead.  Much less to complain about there!  BFN.  

FA> I wasn't complaining..
FA> I just don't agree with calling any program "broken" just
because it's 
FA> not confirming. There is nothing visibly wrong with Msged if it is 

Well, it depends on what your definition of "broken" is.  If you
want a piece of source code that you can take anywhere, including an EBCDIC
MVS machine, and expect it to do exactly what it was doing when you were
running it on a 16-bit DOS machine, then anything that isn't strictly
conforming is broken.  I used to do that a lot.  BFN.  Paul. 
@EOT:

---