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