Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. |
| Date | 2014-06-10 07:45 -0700 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <ln1tuwn7q3.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <C-20140609212332@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <lnioo9n7gz.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <ln58jv$b7s$1@speranza.aioe.org> <lna99ln32t.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <ln5j2m$272$1@speranza.aioe.org> |
glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes:
> Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> wrote:
>
> (snip, I wrote)
>
>>> Writing in both C and Java, I might be a little more sensitive to
>>> the differences between them.
>
> (snip)
>
>> The () form in a declaration says that the function takes a fixed but
>> unspecified number and type(s) of arguments. In a definition, it says
>> that the function has no parameters, but it still provides a declaration
>> with the above meaning.
>
>> The () form is obsolescent, both for declarations and for definitions,
>> and has been since 1989.
>
> But not yet removed from the standard?
Correct, but notice is given that it could be removed from a future
version of the standard.
[...]
>> Recursive calls to main are not common, but they're permitted. The same
>> argument applies to parameterless functions other than main.
>
> I have seen them, but never found a use for it.
Are you referring to recursive calls to main?
The argument is more general than that. If you use empty parentheses
for parameterless functions other than main, then the issue of recursive
calls to main doesn't matter.
Using () rather than (void) on a *declaration* means that the compiler
needn't (and typically won't) diagnose calls with one or more arguments.
Using () on a *definition* is mostly harmless -- unless calls rely on
the declaration provided by the definition. I suppose you could
consistently use () on definitions on (void) on declarations (while
being very careful to *always* provide a separate declaration), but it's
a lot easier to be consistent.
>> What advantage do you see in using "int main()" rather than
>> "int main(void)"? I see none at all.
>
> A few less characters to type. Well, I started C in the K&R days,
> though maybe not by much. About 1985 or so.
I consider that to be no advantage at all. In 1985, the void keyword
didn't exist. It's time to start using it.
>>> That is unlike Java, where the argument signatures (I think that
>>> is what they call them) must match.
>
>> I'd say it's a mistake to base your C coding style on Java.
>> (I'm not sure that's what you're doing.)
>
> I suspect my Java programs look more C-like than the other way around.
>
> If you haven't looked at Java lately, look at System.out.format().
Why?
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Christos Kokaliaris <chrisk.msor@gmail.com> - 2014-06-09 12:12 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Christos Kokaliaris <chrisk.msor@gmail.com> - 2014-06-09 12:41 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2014-06-09 13:16 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-12 09:08 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-12 16:35 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-13 07:27 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-06-14 00:13 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-16 07:07 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-06-16 20:04 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-17 08:56 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-16 12:53 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-16 08:00 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-16 16:01 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-17 08:24 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-18 10:50 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-26 19:07 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-09 19:51 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2014-06-09 20:15 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Christos Kokaliaris <chrisk.msor@gmail.com> - 2014-06-09 13:21 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-09 13:39 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-09 21:23 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-09 21:43 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-10 00:17 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. "BartC" <bc@freeuk.com> - 2014-06-10 11:13 +0100
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-10 07:38 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-10 10:23 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Dr Nick <nospam-4@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2014-06-10 18:55 +0100
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-09 15:14 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-10 00:21 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2014-06-09 21:37 -0400
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-10 07:45 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-11 01:32 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Cal Dershowitz <Cal@example.invalid> - 2014-06-09 23:14 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-10 10:14 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-06-10 22:06 +0300
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-11 16:16 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-11 16:47 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2014-06-11 20:50 +0300
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. raltbos@xs4all.nl (Richard Bos) - 2014-06-11 16:16 +0000
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2014-06-10 08:23 -0600
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-10 10:12 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-12 08:39 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Robert Wessel <robertwessel2@yahoo.com> - 2014-06-12 12:30 -0500
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Seungbeom Kim <musiphil@bawi.org> - 2014-06-10 23:34 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2014-06-11 00:35 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2014-06-11 08:35 -0700
Re: C Programming Language 2nd Ed, Exercise 1.9 and 1.12, Solution suggestion. Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-06-11 15:49 +0000
csiph-web