Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:20813 comp.lang.c:11134 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!ames!killer!tness7!tness1!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Leo's ANSI C Flame Message-ID: <2258@sugar.UUCP> Date: 6 Jul 88 00:19:17 GMT References: <8806292138.AA22025@decwrl.dec.com> <6427@well.UUCP> <2244@sugar.UUCP> <653@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu> Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX Lines: 27 Followups-to: comp.lang.c In article <653@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu>, vkr@osupyr.mast.ohio-state.edu (Vidhyanath K. Rao) writes: > In article <2244@sugar.UUCP>, peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) writes: > > My personal bitch is with compiler writers that implement part of the draft > > and surprise you. > Can ANSI copyright its name and prevent people from advertising 99.44% > compatibiltiy? I believe that this is done with TeX. > Shouldn't this discussion be moved to comp.languages.c or some such? Yeh, probably. Thing is, said compiler writer didn't advertise ANSI compatibility. They just put the features in as part of what I surmise is a gradual improvement effort. It could be they didn't even get them from ANSI. Oh well... It's a bummer when they put in structure passing without function prototyping, and you accidentally screw up and forget an & in passing a pointer to a structure. If you had function prototyping it'd say "hey, bonehead, you said the function took a pointer". If you didn't have structure passing it'd say "hey, bonehead, you can't pass a structure to a function". Instead it just happily takes the first couple of elements of the structure as a pointer and scribbles on memory. Oh well, I only made that particular mistake half a dozen times. I don't do it much any more. -- -- `-_-' Peter (have you hugged your wolf today?) da Silva. -- U Mail to ...!uunet!sugar!peter, flames to /dev/null. -- "Running DOS on a '386 is like driving an Indy car to the Stop-N-Go"