Felipe Tanus wrote:
Hi John, thank you for the answer.
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:34 PM, John B. Turpish <jbturp@gmail.com> wrote:
[...] but I could see reasons why someone would intentionally mess with argv[0]. Maybe support the current API and add a convenience function?
I can't see why someone would mess with argv[0]. Considering that there is a motive to do that, your suggestion would fit perfectly. Can you please give me an example?
There are executables that behave differently depending on the name in argv[0], such as ccache (http://ccache.samba.org/) which emulates different compilers. Normally this happens by creating appropriately named symlinks, but perhaps someone might want to do it directly? Would the current interface support that? John Bytheway