Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 (Tek) 9/28/84 based on 9/17/84; site hammer.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!houxm!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!hammer!seifert
From: seifert@hammer.UUCP (Snoopy)
Newsgroups: net.sources.bugs,net.lang.c,net.unix-wizards
Subject: Re: efopen.c (about void voids)
Message-ID: <1594@hammer.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 29-Oct-85 15:12:43 EST
Article-I.D.: hammer.1594
Posted: Tue Oct 29 15:12:43 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Nov-85 02:16:17 EST
References: <1741@watdcsu.UUCP> <2109@brl-tgr.ARPA> <796@rlgvax.UUCP> <493@ttrdc.UUCP> <210@l5.uucp> <267@frog.UUCP>
Reply-To: tekecs!doghouse.TEK!snoopy
Distribution: net
Organization: The Daisy Hill Puppy Farm
Lines: 18
Xref: watmath net.sources.bugs:557 net.lang.c:6881 net.unix-wizards:15521

In article <267@frog.UUCP> john@frog.UUCP (John Woods) writes:

>Although I am sure that someone has a compiler for which the following will
>not make sense, in general the construct
>
>#ifndef lint
>#define void int
>#endif
>
>allows one to have one's cake and eat it too.

What doesn't make sense is having a combination of compiler and lint
where one knows about void and the other doesn't.

(Sure it's *possible*, but WHY?)

Snoopy
tektronix!tekecs!doghouse.TEK!snoopy