Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #67023 > unrolled thread

how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef;

Started byG G <gdotone@gmail.com>
First post2019-07-12 15:12 -0700
Last post2019-07-17 12:53 +0100
Articles 2 on this page of 22 — 10 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

Contents

  how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2019-07-12 15:12 -0700
    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; Mr Flibble <flibbleREMOVETHISBIT@i42.co.uk> - 2019-07-12 23:16 +0100
      Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; G G <gdotone@gmail.com> - 2019-07-12 15:21 -0700
    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2019-07-12 18:55 -0400
    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-07-12 18:55 -0700
    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; Szyk Cech <szykcech@spoko.pl> - 2019-07-13 05:33 +0200
    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-07-15 20:33 +0000
      Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-07-15 23:03 +0100
        Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-07-15 18:31 -0700
          Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-07-16 03:04 +0100
            Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-07-16 05:59 -0700
          Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2019-07-16 05:48 +0200
            Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-07-16 08:47 +0200
              Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2019-07-16 11:52 +0200
                Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-07-16 12:45 +0200
                  Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; "Alf P. Steinbach" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2019-07-17 07:06 +0200
                    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2019-07-17 08:17 +0200
                    Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2019-07-17 14:03 +0000
            Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2019-07-16 07:36 -0700
            Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs int& numberRef; Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-07-17 07:25 +0000
        Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> - 2019-07-17 07:24 +0000
          Re: how/why it is written ... int &numberRef; vs  int& numberRef; Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2019-07-17 12:53 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#67077

FromJuha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid>
Date2019-07-17 07:24 +0000
Message-ID<qgmiem$2bem$1@adenine.netfront.net>
In reply to#67047
Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
> Neither B nor BCPL had types.  C was originally "B with types".

Is that the reason why in pre-standard C specifying types was
optional, and if you didn't specify them, they defaulted to int?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#67083

FromBen Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Date2019-07-17 12:53 +0100
Message-ID<87o91szxl1.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
In reply to#67077
Juha Nieminen <nospam@thanks.invalid> writes:

> Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>> Neither B nor BCPL had types.  C was originally "B with types".
>
> Is that the reason why in pre-standard C specifying types was
> optional, and if you didn't specify them, they defaulted to int?

Almost certainly.  In B you'd write

  auto a, b, c;

in a function a just

  a, b, c;

at file scope.  I am sure it was considered a good idea to be able to
convert B programs to "new B" and later to early C with as few edits as
possible.

-- 
Ben.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web