This is a discussion on open, fopen ? within the C Programming forums, part of the General Programming Boards category; Hey, one can use fopen to write/read binary data to/from a file. The same can also be achieved by using ...
Hey,
one can use fopen to write/read binary data to/from a file.
The same can also be achieved by using open.
What exactly are the differences?
As far as I know fopen is standard C and platform independent, right? It also its a buffered I/O.
open on the other hand is declared in different headers for different platforms and its low level (unbuffered) I/O. And therefor should be faster?
Any additional comments or corrections are welcome.
Mat.
> As far as I know fopen is standard C and platform independent, right?
Yes.
> It also its a buffered I/O.
By default, yes.
See also setvbuf()
> open on the other hand is declared in different headers for different platforms
And the parameters sometimes vary as well.
> And therefor should be faster?
Probably - but the difference between the two is seldom exciting enough to sacrifice portability.
If you dance barefoot on the broken glass of undefined behaviour, you've got to expect the occasional cut.
If at first you don't succeed, try writing your phone number on the exam paper.
I support http://www.ukip.org/ as the first necessary step to a free Europe.
Using low-level I/O can be slower if you use it incorrectly. Calls to read()/write() are much slower than calls to fread()/fwrite()/fprintf()/etc. (which is the purpose for the buffer in the first place). If you're reading/writing data in large chunks, the low-level I/O is usually faster, but for reading/writing data in smaller bits the stdio routines are faster.
If you understand what you're doing, you're not learning anything.
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
