Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ecsvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!bellcore!decvax!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary
From: dgary@ecsvax.UUCP (D Gary Grady)
Newsgroups: net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re:  smart compilers
Message-ID: <470@ecsvax.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Jan-85 14:28:12 EST
Article-I.D.: ecsvax.470
Posted: Mon Jan  7 14:28:12 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 11-Jan-85 05:03:12 EST
References: <7024@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Organization: Duke U Comp Ctr
Lines: 21

<>
Mark Crispin  writes:
>     I may be mistaken, but I believe according to the standards it is
> not only "poor style" to change a constant which was passed to a subroutine,
> it is also undefined what the behavior of the system after that should be.
...
> You really have no
> hope for catching this at compile-time; the earliest you can do it is when
> linking the modules together.

What's so hard about the calling program always moving the constant to
a work area and passing the address of that?  As I said before, that's
equivalent to just considering a constant a special case of an
expression.

-- 

D Gary Grady
Duke University Computation Center, Durham, NC  27706
(919) 684-4146
USENET:  {decvax,ihnp4,akgua,etc.}!mcnc!ecsvax!dgary