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