Article View: comp.std.c
Article #98Re: int foo[]; vs. extern int foo[];
From: Larry Jones
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 1992 17:21
Date: Sat, 08 Aug 1992 17:21
15 lines
1131 bytes
1131 bytes
In article <BsIFLn.6IH@twwells.com>, bill@twwells.com (T. William Wells) writes:
> : I suppose it might be considered a problem that 3.7.2 specifies that the
> : initializer is "equal to 0", which might or might not be seen as equal to
> : "{0}" as is necessary to initialize an array,
>
> That is exactly the problem.
I remember discussing this issue, so it's probably the subject of
an interpretation request. The committee's position was that that
statement specifies the value of the initializer, not the actual
syntax which would appear in the source to achieve it.
----
Larry Jones, SDRC, 2000 Eastman Dr., Milford, OH 45150-2789 513-576-2070
Domain: lawrence.jones@sdrc.com IBMMAIL: USSDR7DR at IBMMAIL
I just can't identify with that kind of work ethic. -- Calvin
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<1948@sdrc.COM>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sdrc!thor!scjonesReferences:
<Bs938o.54A@twwells.com> <14383@ksr.com> <BsIFLn.6IH@twwells.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!sdrc!thor!scjones From: scjones@thor.sdrc.com (Larry Jones) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: int foo[]; vs. extern int foo[]; Message-ID: <1948@sdrc.COM> Date: 8 Aug 92 17:21:48 GMT References: <Bs938o.54A@twwells.com> <14383@ksr.com> <BsIFLn.6IH@twwells.com> Sender: news@sdrc.COM Lines: 15