🚀 go-pugleaf

>In article <765@happym.wa.com> I mention that my compiler mishandles
>> p && free(p);

In article <21@desint.UUCP> geoff@desint.UUCP (Geoff Kuenning) writes:
>Note that this is an illegal statement on most modern Unixes, because free()
>is (or should be) declared with a void return value.  (Of course, if free()
>is replaced by any routine that returns a value, the compiler should be
>able to handle it, regardless of the fact that it is horrible coding style.)

Perhaps it is horrible coding style, and perhaps it is not, depending on
who you ask.  I probably use a lot of methods that you would call horrible.

If you ask Richard Stallman, I hope he says it isn't, because GNU is rife
with it.

In any case, the language that we call C supports that style, while the
program that Motorola calls a C compiler does not, and so does not compile
unmodified GNU sources.

-- 
 kent@happym.wa.com, tikal!camco!happym!kent, Happy Man Corp 206-282-9598