consistency in declaration
Eric Giguere
jyegiguere at lion.waterloo.edu
Mon Jun 19 05:26:23 AEST 1989
Alright, it would seem I'm outvoted on this parm-list-with-and-without-IDs
discussion.... maybe I'll suggest to my boss that we support it, but I think
we have other more important things to worry about. Then again, we never
claim anywhere in our docs to be completely ANSI-compatible, only that we
support most of the draft proposed Standard... we've always hesitated to use
the phrase "ANSI-compatible" when there is no such thing (officially) yet
and the draft kept changing... Remember the good ol' "noalias" keyword
a couple of drafts back? I know of at least one compiler (hint: it also
comes out of Waterloo) that supported it... then the Committee took it out.
Ooops! Well, it's not as if that would break existing code or anything.
So for now I guess I would just label the whole mess as an "unsupported
feature" and leave it at that.
Eric Giguere 268 Phillip St #CL-46
For the curious: it's French ("jee-gair") Waterloo, Ontario N2L 6G9
Bitnet : GIGUERE at WATCSG (519) 746-6565
Internet: giguere at aries5.UWaterloo.ca "Nothing but urges from HELL!!"
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list