a "derived-declarator-type-list" isn't
diamond@tkovoa
diamond at tkou02.enet.dec.com
Fri Oct 12 11:58:37 AEST 1990
In article <1990Oct8.000812.24800 at zoo.toronto.edu> henry at zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer) writes:
>In several of the subsections of 3.5.4, the result of a particular form
>of declarator is defined in terms of the result of a simpler form, which
>is said to supply a type "derived-declarator-type-list T".
>There is just one problem with this. Nothing ever defines what a d-d-t-l
>is. Despite the name, it is not a list of derived declarator types,
>and indeed it is not a list of types at all.
Perhaps it is just a typo (perhaps a forgotten edit) for, simply,
"derived declarator type" which is defined in 3.1.2.5?
And if it isn't, then would someone please be kind enough to post the
correct definition?
--
Norman Diamond, Nihon DEC diamond at tkov50.enet.dec.com
(tkou02 is scheduled for demolition)
We steer like a sports car: I use opinions; the company uses the rack.
More information about the Comp.std.c
mailing list