Re: pass by address

From	Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: pass by address
Date	2014-05-03 22:33 +0200
Organization	http://www.ieee.org/
Message-ID	<87lhuihab0.fsf@gmail.com> (permalink)
References	(1 earlier) <NxU8v.443052$1p2.55006@fx13.iad> <lk152a$1vf$1@dont-email.me> <bfa8m9hgf8af40gkotf6mgv3ke08mpep0d@4ax.com> <lk31k5$f9h$1@dont-email.me> <lnd2fulkqv.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org>

Show all headers | View raw

Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> writes:

> "Bill Cunningaham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:
> [...]
>> int a=15;
>> int *p;
>> p=&a; // And my compiler complains about that. It calls it old style and 
>> says = & if I remember right.
>
> Really?
>
> In very early versions of C, the compound assignment operators put
> the "=" before the operator rather than after it.  For example,
> the old syntax to subtract 2 from i was
>     i =- 2;
> rather than the modern
>     i -= 2;
>
> This caused ambiguities if you didn't use enough whitespace,
> resolved as usual via the "maximal munch" rule.  For example:
>
>     i=-2;
>
> would subtract 2 from i rather than assigning the value -2 to i.
> Problems could occur for any unary operator that uses the same
> symbol as a binary operator that can be part of a compound assignment
> operator.
>
> The syntax of compound assignment operators was changed before the
> publication of K&R1 in 1978.  Some older compilers would warn about
> code that would be parsed differently under the old and new rules.
> I've even used a compiler that would warn about it and then use the
> old interpretation (it recognized modern operators in unambiguous
> cases); fortunately we also had a more modern compiler available.
>
> Bill, the compiler complaint you describe is consistent with
> your using an old compiler that warns about code whose meaning
> differs between the ancient and modern versions of the language.
> As I recall, you use gcc, which certainly doesn't warn about such
> things by default, and as far as I know cannot even be made to warn
> about them.
>
> And the code that was suggested to you upthread used:
>     p = &a;
> which you changed for some reason to:
>     p=&a;
>
> I'd be interested in knowing exactly what compiler you're using,
> what OS you're using it on, and seeing the exact copy-and-pasted
> diagnostic message from that compiler.

ROTFLM!

http://www.politicsforum.org/images/flame_warriors/flame_61.php


-- 
"Avoid hyperbole at all costs, its the most destructive argument on
the planet" - Mark McIntyre in comp.lang.c

Thread

pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-02 16:53 -0400
  Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-02 17:03 -0400
    Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-02 17:20 -0400
  Re: pass by address Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2014-05-02 17:58 -0400
    Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-02 18:09 -0400
      Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-02 16:37 -0700
        Re: pass by address gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-05-02 23:43 +0000
          Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 15:58 +0200
            Re: pass by address gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2014-05-03 14:08 +0000
              Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-03 10:38 -0700
                Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 21:13 +0200
        Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-03 01:46 -0400
        Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningaham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-03 11:22 -0400
          Re: pass by address James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-05-03 12:13 -0400
          Re: pass by address Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-05-03 12:34 -0700
            Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 22:33 +0200
            Re: pass by address glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-05-03 21:21 +0000
              Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-04 00:08 -0400
                Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-03 21:52 -0700
                Re: pass by address Tonton Th <tth@nowhere.invalid> - 2014-05-04 08:44 +0000
                Re: pass by address Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-05-04 01:51 -0700
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-04 15:06 -0400
                Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-04 15:35 -0700
                Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-05 12:01 +0200
                Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-05 11:46 -0700
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-05 14:18 -0400
                Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-05 11:55 -0700
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-05 15:20 -0400
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-05 15:23 -0400
                Re: pass by address Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2014-05-06 11:02 -0400
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 14:46 -0400
                Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-05 12:00 +0200
                Re: pass by address Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2014-05-05 14:50 -0700
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-05 23:13 -0400
                Re: pass by address "Osmium" <r124c4u102@comcast.net> - 2014-05-05 23:09 -0500
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-06 08:55 -0400
                Re: pass by address Ken Brody <kenbrody@spamcop.net> - 2014-05-06 11:16 -0400
                Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-06 18:13 +0200
                Re: pass by address Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-05-04 21:06 +0000
                Re: pass by address Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-05-04 23:50 +0000
                Re: pass by address Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-05-04 12:36 -0700
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-05 14:21 -0400
                Re: pass by address Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-05-04 01:29 -0700
                Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-04 15:09 -0400
        Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningaham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-03 11:32 -0400
  Re: pass by address Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-05-02 16:43 -0700
    Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-03 01:54 -0400
      Re: pass by address Richard <rgrdev_@gmail.com> - 2014-05-03 15:59 +0200
    Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningham" <nosapm@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-03 02:08 -0400
      Re: pass by address "Bill Cunningaham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2014-05-03 11:46 -0400
    Re: pass by address Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-05-03 21:43 +0000

csiph-web