Richard Earnshaw wrote:
> 
> Indeed.  Actually, the fact that isXXX are usually macros makes no 
> difference -- if you pass a signed char to an isXXX function you'll get 
> the wrong results as well, because these functions take an int argument 
> and promotion of signed char to int will sign-extend.  Conclusion - don't 
> pass char types to isXXX.
> 

I'm already understand and in conformance of all of these.

Thanks a lot for all you for your support and incovenience!

--
Truly yours,
Mishka.