home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.programming
- Path: sparky!uunet!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!pa.dec.com!decprl!decprl!boyd
- From: boyd@prl.dec.com (Boyd Roberts)
- Subject: Re: ANSI C, was Re: Teaching the basics
- Message-ID: <1992Aug22.113219.4821@prl.dec.com>
- Sender: news@prl.dec.com (USENET News System)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: prl313.prl.dec.com
- Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation - Paris Research Laboratory
- References: <1992Aug21.154839.2664@organpipe.uug.arizona.edu> <1992Aug21.232022.28931@prl.dec.com> <1992Aug22.034214.19539@linus.mitre.org>
- Date: Sat, 22 Aug 1992 11:32:19 GMT
- Lines: 21
-
- In article <1992Aug22.034214.19539@linus.mitre.org>, crawford@church.mitre.org (Randy Crawford) writes:
- >
- > And why would you want to defer the task until the link step? Don't you _want_
- > to be told ASAP that your argument types don't match those of the function you
- > are calling or that you've provided the wrong number of arguments in the call?
- >
- > That's the reasoning behind why compilers and linkers rely on function
- > prototypes.
-
- Nonsense. Prototypes are cheap hack, and they can lie, whereas the actual
- function declaration specifies it exactly. The protypes just say that the
- calls agree with the prototypes, and that's not the same as the actual
- declaration.
-
- Putting extra info in the object would be a total win. Why should I go to
- declare my functions twice, when the machine can do that stuff for me?
-
-
- Boyd Roberts boyd@prl.dec.com
-
- ``When the going gets wierd, the weird turn pro...''
-