Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!lvc From: lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Lawrence V. Cipriani) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: C Compiler bugs (was Re: Speaking of ksh) Message-ID: <15202@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> Date: 6 Jun 88 20:31:08 GMT References: <15085@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> <4421@haddock.ISC.COM> Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Computer and Information Science Lines: 20 In article <4421@haddock.ISC.COM> karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer) writes: >In article <15085@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu> lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Lawrence V. Cipriani) writes: ... ** struct blob { int a, b, c; } /* missing ; */ ** main(argc, argv) ... *Why should it be considered a "compiler bug" when a syntactically correct *program containing a user bug dumps core? It seems to me that the appropriate *"fix" is to make sure that lint complains about the mismatched declaration. *Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint It certainly would be appropriate for lint, but don't you think this is a stupid thing for a compiler to allow? Maybe not, but I do. I think compilers should check semantic correctness when possible as well as for syntactic correctness. At least a warning message would be useful, also not every implementation of C is accompanied by lint. -- Larry Cipriani, AT&T Network Systems and Ohio State University Domain: lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Path: ...!cbosgd!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!lvc (strange but true)