Re: #define MAX(), DNM and a working program?

Article View: csu.cs.200

Article #204

#204

From: Adam Carheden
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 1998 00:00

9 lines
1017 bytes

No, my Rect. is tomorrow, but in case I don't go, are they overriding
the "...must work without changing any code in the main program..."?
Am I correct in guessing that it shouldn't really matter since the
implementation of the ADTs would be the same with the original or
modified Main4.C?
-- 
Adam
carheden@holly.colostate.edu
http://holly.ColoState.edu/~carheden

Technical Details

Message-ID: <361BFCD2.C2222623@holly.colostate.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!unknown!not-for-mail

References: <3619BA92.A76AECE5@holly.colostate.edu> <361A3923.E6CA7C51@holly.colostate.edu> <361BC00C.C00C37B0@holly.colostate.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 127144,b0bd8a3d32c829be
X-Google-Attributes: gid127144,public
From: Adam Carheden <carheden@holly.colostate.edu>
Subject: Re: #define MAX(), DNM and a working program?
Date: 1998/10/07
Message-ID: <361BFCD2.C2222623@holly.colostate.edu>
X-Deja-AN: 398814977
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
References: <3619BA92.A76AECE5@holly.colostate.edu> <361A3923.E6CA7C51@holly.colostate.edu> <361BC00C.C00C37B0@holly.colostate.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO  80523
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: csu.cs.200

Reply to Parent Message