🚀 go-pugleaf

Soenke Behrens writes
> achauhan@warsaw.math.macalstr.edu (Amrit Chauhan) writes:
> >Soenke Behrens writes
> >> chauhan@aristotle.ils.nwu.edu (Amrit Chauhan) writes:

> Yeah, let's nest ;)

If you insist .... ;)

> >> Don't do that. It's not illegal, but better be explicit. I.e.
> >> int
> >> main (int argc, char *argv[])
> >> {
> >> even if you do not use argc and argv.

> >Hmm, I should probably get in the practice of doing this.  What
> >would I do if I wasn't writing a shell program?  I mean, would you
> >still need to be explicit about what gets passed to main?

> Hmm. On the GS, you could also say int main (void) or void main (void)
> for a shell program. There are architectures that don't like that, though.
> When writing a desktop program that is not to be called as a shell program,
> I'd say go with 'void main (void)', as you neither get parameters nor return
> an exit value.

> > C Primer Plus

> Is it any good? The book, I mean? From what you told us, I have my doubts :)

I don't think the book is all that bad at all...granted, it didn't really  
"teach" me a couple of little quirks but that's ok...that's what you're here  
for :)  But, I think that I'm learning what I need to know to at least get  
started.  There are a couple of things I would change, but all in all, it's  
still a pretty good book.
 
> >..and don't we know how big MY bank account is :)  yeah right..

> Sure :) But don't feel bad, I do not have those books (Algorithms in C,
> the Knuth series, Programming Pearls), either ... though
> I won't be able to avoid buying them *sigh*

> Yours

> Soenke

Thanks again Soenke :)

--
< >  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++  < >
<++> Amrit Chauhan		   <++>
<++> achauhan@math.macalstr.edu    <++>
< >  +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++  < >