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