Re: Intermediate addr outside object: legal?

Article View: comp.std.c

Article #184

#184

From: Norman Diamond
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 1992 00:21

18 lines
1344 bytes

In article <1992Apr4.095414.8594@druid.uucp> darcy@druid.uucp (D'Arcy J.M. Cain)
 writes:
>Chapter 3.3.2.1 says that E1[E2] is identical to "(*(E1+(E2)))."  After
>expanding macros the above becomes "(foo - 8000)[9000]" which is
>identical to "(*((foo - 8000)+(9000)))."

Yes.

>Removing superfluous parens that gives "*(foo - 8000 + 9000)" or
>"*(foo + 1000)" which looks perfectly legitimate to me.

Great!  If anyone has problems with standard-conforming implementations
which don't necessarily volunteer to remove superfluous parens, you'll
execute their programs for them?
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@jit081.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.
"Yeah -- bad wiring.  That was probably it.  Very bad."

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Apr6.002128.13746@news.jit.dec.com>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!decwrl!pa.dec.com!jrdzzz.jrd.dec.com!usenet

References: <2160001@aspen.IAG.HP.COM> <1992Apr4.095414.8594@druid.uucp>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!decwrl!pa.dec.com!jrdzzz.jrd.dec.com!usenet
From: diamond@jit533.jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Subject: Re: Intermediate addr outside object: legal?
Message-ID: <1992Apr6.002128.13746@news.jit.dec.com>
Lines: 17
Sender: usenet@news.jit.dec.com (USENET News System)
Nntp-Posting-Host: jit345
Reply-To: diamond@jit.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
References: <2160001@aspen.IAG.HP.COM> <1992Apr4.095414.8594@druid.uucp>
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 00:21:28 GMT
Lines: 18

Reply to Parent Message