Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ptsfa!ames!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!esosun!seismo!uunet!nuchat!sugar!peter From: peter@sugar.UUCP (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: C blocks Keywords: why not Message-ID: <1257@sugar.UUCP> Date: 14 Dec 87 18:34:06 GMT References: <470@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> Organization: Sugar Land UNIX - Houston, TX Lines: 17 In article <470@PT.CS.CMU.EDU>, edw@IUS1.CS.CMU.EDU (Eddie Wyatt) writes: > Could the ANSI committee consider adding return values for blocks? How very BCPL of you. > If they where added, I could guarentee my macro arguments where only > evaluated once as they are in function calls. So please, please, > please consider adding them. They won't, because the only compiler I ever heard of that implemented them was the version of Small-C I enhanced with all sorts of BCPLoid features. ANSI's only adding stuff that's been around for awhile in some sort of commercial compiler and has shown itself useful. Pity, but you can see their point. -- -- Peter da Silva `-_-' ...!hoptoad!academ!uhnix1!sugar!peter -- Disclaimer: These U aren't mere opinions... these are *values*.