Undelivered mail

[MAILER%ALASKA.BITNET at CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU]

Subject:  Re: volatiles/consts inside structs in dpANS C

[Non-Deliverable:  User does not exist or has never logged on]

Reply-To: Info-C at BRL.ARPA

Received: From UWAVM(MAILER) by ALASKA with Jnet id 1209
          for SXJVK at ALASKA; Sun, 13 Mar 88 06:23 AST
Received: by UWAVM (Mailer X1.25) id 7098; Sun, 13 Mar 88 07:23:22 PST
Date:         Sun, 13 Mar 88 00:54:11 GMT
Reply-To:     Info-C at BRL.ARPA
Sender:       Info-C List <INFO-C at NDSUVM1>
From:         Henry Spencer <henry at utzoo.uucp>
Subject:      Re: volatiles/consts inside structs in dpANS C
Comments: To: info-c at BRL-SMOKE.arpa
To:           Vic Kapella <SXJVK at ALASKA>

As I recall (my copy isn't handy), the latest draft says that const,
volatile, etc. inside a struct sort of pop to the surface when you attempt
something like an assignment.  So assigning to a struct with a const
member is illegal.  Personally, I think such "buried qualifiers" should
simply be illegal, since they are useless...
--
Those who do not understand Unix are |  Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
condemned to reinvent it, poorly.    | {allegra,ihnp4,decvax,utai}!utzoo!henry