Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!homxb!ho7cad!ekb From: ekb@ho7cad.UUCP Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc Subject: Re: Mesa is a dreadful language? Message-ID: <194@ho7cad.ATT.COM> Date: Thu, 9-Jul-87 10:27:02 EDT Article-I.D.: ho7cad.194 Posted: Thu Jul 9 10:27:02 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 12-Jul-87 09:06:40 EDT References:<8268@utzoo.UUCP> <764@unc.cs.unc.edu> Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel, NJ Lines: 15 Summary: pointers != ints in K&R In article <764@unc.cs.unc.edu>, rentsch@unc.cs.unc.edu (Tim Rentsch) writes: > On the other hand, I thought the C language definition (as opposed to > any particular implementation) is "pointers are ints" and so forth. > Am I wrong? (By language definition I mean K&R, of course, not any > proposed standard.) Or are you just telling me that C compilers are > getting better? That's a different horse altogether... I do not agree that K&R say that "pointers are ints". At the end of section 7.14 of Appendix A, they say that "currently", compilers do allow assignment between integers [not necessarily "int"s] and pointers, but that the usage is non-portable. I would interpret this as just saying that the compilers of that time were rather flexible about this, but that it was not really condoned. = Eric