Errata in K&R2 and H&S3 (was: Harbison & Steele)

[Blair P. Houghton]

In article <ndtg!6d at rpi.edu> xor at aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Joseph Schwartz) writes:
[...there's bugs in KnRII, too...]

Periodicity:  one semester.

Okay, before everyone goes posting their faves, here's
a list of errata that Dennis Ritchie posted two years ago.
They should actually have been included in later printings
of the book, by now.

I don't have a list for H&S.  I don't even have my own
copy of H&S.  I do have my own copy of the Standard,
so I don't really want a copy of H&S.  Not unexpectedly,
the Standard, by definition, is error-free :-).

Please check this list before posting.

				--Blair
				  "Wishful thinking."

  >From davea%quasar.wpd.sgi.com at SGI.COM Fri Oct  5 13:43:18 1990
  Date: Fri, 5 Oct 90 13:40:42 PDT
  >From: davea%quasar.wpd.sgi.com at SGI.COM
  Subject: dmr's posting attached
  To: bhoughto at cmdnfs.intel.com, poser at csli.Stanford.EDU
  Message-Id: <9010052040.AA09702 at quasar.wpd.sgi.com>
  Status: R
  
  
  You asked: here it is.
  Regards,
  [ David B. Anderson  Silicon Graphics  (415)335-1548  davea at sgi.com ]
  [``What can go wrong?''                          --Calvin and Hobbes]
  
  --------------------cut here-----------------------------
  
  >Article 19774 of comp.lang.c:
  >From: dmr at alice.UUCP
  Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
  Subject: Re: Updates to K&R 2
  Message-ID: <9436 at alice.UUCP>
  Date: 5 Jun 89 07:48:55 GMT
  Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
  Lines: 98
  
  I was a bit surprised to see Chris Beierl's posting of the errata
  for K&R second edition.  More accurately, I was surprised to hear
  that it was present in his copy of the book, since it was prepared
  for posting to this group.  We thought we gave it to our editor at
  Prentice-Hall for his information; he didn't tell us that it
  was to be included as an errata list, or even let us know that
  this was possible.  We would have worded it a bit differently.
  
  In any event, here is what we have now.  All of these changes
  should be in the second printing.  The main difference between
  this and what Beierl posted is the addition of the statement
  about initialization of automatic arrays on p. 86.
  
  [Incidentally, the range of tm_sec is really 0 through 61.
  It seems that two consecutive leap seconds are permitted.]
  
  	Dennis Ritchie
  	dmr at research.att.com
  	att!research!dmr
  
  ---------
  Now that X3J11 has voted to send its draft to X3, and further
  substantive changes in the draft standard are unlikely, Brian
  and I are preparing fixes to put in any future printings
  of the second edition of "The C Programming Language."
  Fortunately, they are minor.  For the benefit of previous
  and near-future purchasers, here are the changes that were made:
  
  Two or three sentences in the Preface and Introduction are updated
  to describe the state of the Standard.
  
  atof is in stdlib.h, not math.h: changes 71, 76, 82, 121.
  
  On page 86, error corrected:  missing automatic array initializers
  are zero too.
  
  On page 168: changed 1 to 1.0 in frand() to avoid potential overflow.
  
  Minor typos are corrected on pages 87, 89, 164, 165, 180.
  
  The inconspicuous references to 'noalias' on pages 192 and
  212 are removed.
  
  The following paragraph is added to the end of section A6.6 (p 199):
  
  	A pointer may be converted to another pointer whose type
  	is the same except for the addition or removal of qualifiers
  	(A4.4, A8.2) of the object type to which the pointer
  	refers.  If qualifiers are added, the new pointer is
  	equivalent to the old except for restrictions implied
  	by the new qualifiers.  If qualifiers are removed, operations
  	on the underlying object remain subject to the qualifiers
  	in its actual declaration.
  
  On p. 199, beginning of section A6.8, "Any pointer may be converted
  to type void *..." is changed to "Any pointer >to an object< may
  be converted to type void *...".
  
  On p. 204, A7.4.4, "The operand of the unary + operator must have
  arithmetic or pointer type..." should read "must have arithmetic type...".
  
  On p. 206, A7.9, about relational operators:  "Pointers to objects
  of the same type may be compared..." is changed to "Pointers to
  object of the same type >(ignoring any qualifiers)< may be compared...".
  
  The indented material on p. 209, "According to the restrictions...
  relaxing it." is removed.   [This is related to the paragraph added above.
  The wording of the draft of a year ago made it useless to
  take an (int *) pointer, cast it to (const int *), then cast
  it back to (int *).]
  
  On p. 219 middle, initialization of structures, add "Unnamed bit-field
  members are ignored, and are not initialized."
  
  
  Appendix B changes:
  
  p 242:  add "fflush(NULL) flushes all output streams." to fflush description.
  
  p 243:  change to "it must be called before reading, writing >or any
  other operation<" in setvbuf description.
  
  p 249:  add "Comparison functions treat arguments as unsigned char arrays."
  to string.h description.
  
  p 255:  change range of tm_sec to (0,61) for leap seconds.
  	CLK_TCK was changed late (12/15/88) to CLOCKS_PER_SEC.
  
  p 257:  drop U and L suffixes from <limits.h> constants.
  	tm_sec range (00,61) here too.
  
  Appendix C change:
  
  p 261:  Change "External declarations without any specifiers..." to
  	"External >data< declarations without any specifiers...".
  
  The index has been reprinted to fix a couple of typos and account for
  motion within Appendix A;  one page of the table of contents is changed.