Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 (Fortune 01.1b1); site graffiti.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!ut-sally!ut-ngp!shell!graffiti!peter From: peter@graffiti.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Re: Type modifiers in C Message-ID: <389@graffiti.UUCP> Date: Sat, 2-Nov-85 23:12:20 EST Article-I.D.: graffiti.389 Posted: Sat Nov 2 23:12:20 1985 Date-Received: Mon, 4-Nov-85 03:11:56 EST References: <943@lll-crg.ARpA> <177@opus.UUCP> Organization: The Power Elite, Houston, TX Lines: 28 > sense the static-vs-automatic distinction should be propagated. (In some > languages it would be prohibited to assign the address of an automatic > variable to a more global pointer--i.e., a pointer whose extent exceeds > that of the variable.) I hope they never put that in 'C'. After all... char *myname; usage(s) char *s; { fprintf(stderr, "Unknown flag %s.\nUsage: %s ....\n", s, myname); } main(ac, av) int ac; char **av; { ... myname=av[0]; ... usage(av[i]); } -- Name: Peter da Silva Graphic: `-_-' UUCP: ...!shell!{graffiti,baylor}!peter IAEF: ...!kitty!baylor!peter