Re: master ed84f24a21: Make `signal-process' allow completing over signal names

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:

>> Oh, you mean the loop ends one too early?  Yes, that's true.  Can't have
>> new code without at least one off-by-one error; that's illegal.
>
> I also meant that the loop should end at NSIG - 1, or SIGRTMAX, instead
> of an arbitrary number (254).

I wasn't able to convince myself that SIGRTMIN/MAX was defined on all
systems (the ones that have an OS-defined sig2str), so I just used
magical numbers (that are way too big on any OS) instead.  But if you
want to adjust, please go ahead.

-- 
(domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.)
   bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no