GCC's no help (spoiler*epsilon: then again, given the dodginess, I can't
imagine how it would detect it without unacceptable overheads):
phil@duospaz:tmp$ gcc -ansi -pedantic -Wall -Wextra -c crap.c
phil@duospaz:tmp$ gcc -std=c99 -Wall -Wextra -c crap.c
phil@duospaz:tmp$
Was I slow?
No point leaving you on the hook unnecessarily. Gentle and complete
spoilers both in headers.
Phil
--
I find the easiest thing to do is to k/f myself and just troll away
-- David Melville on r.a.s.f1
No, your platform was unhelpful in its definition!
c99 /tmp/x.c
"/tmp/x.c", line 3: unacceptable operand for unary &
gcc /tmp/x.c
/tmp/x.c: In function 'get_stuff_done':
/tmp/x.c:3: error: invalid lvalue in unary '&'
> No point leaving you on the hook unnecessarily. Gentle and complete
> spoilers both in headers.
Cool comments!
I'll follow up with the Solaris definitions if anyone's interested.
--
Ian Collins
Ooh, sneaky. If "stdin" isn't actually an object of type "FILE *",
but an expression yielding one, it can indeed be invalid to take its
address. That would not have occurred to me.
I do actually have a hunk of code floating around which uses a FILE **,
but it operates only on the addresses of FILE * objects I've declared
myself.
-s
--
Copyright 2010, all wrongs reversed. Peter Seebach / usenet...@seebs.net
http://www.seebs.net/log/ <-- lawsuits, religion, and funny pictures
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Game_(Scientology) <-- get educated!
I'm reading this in Google groups, and have no idea how to "read the
headers" or whether this is even possible. Could you put the comments
somewhere I can read them, please?
Thanks.
Paul.
There's also the tiny matter of attempting output on the
standard input stream. Been abusing freopen(), have we?
--
Eric Sosman
eso...@ieee-dot-org.invalid
C++ users who've tried std::stdin often become quickly aware that
stdin is actually a macro.
--
Peter
<Unruffle> freopen exists exactly for that reason, so it's
not 'abuse' at all!
Good catch; that was completely accidental. I'm glad that the
real dodginess I was referring to was still visible behind that.
Cheers,
> I'm reading this in Google groups, and have no idea how to "read the
> headers" or whether this is even possible. Could you put the comments
> somewhere I can read them, please?
Click "more options", then "show original".
Brian
--
Day 420 of the "no grouchy usenet posts" project
> Phil Carmody wrote:
>
>> No point leaving you on the hook unnecessarily. Gentle and complete
>> spoilers both in headers.
>
> I'm reading this in Google groups, and have no idea how to "read the
> headers" or whether this is even possible.
??
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.lang.c/msg/4b566d77d29182f2?dmode=source