Re: private functions
- From: Richard<rgrdev@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 22:19:11 +0200
Eric Sosman <esosman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Richard wrote:
Eric Sosman <esosman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
Richard wrote:
"Joachim Schmitz" <nospam.jojo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:Nonsense. And if you're afraid, cower.
Ronald Bruck wrote:Nonsense. Of course you can do this in C. Non "standard" extensions are
Sigh. It's been awhile since I've programmed in C, but I'm SURE thatYou simply can't do this in C.
you can have a function whose scope is purely within another function.
still "C" I am afraid.
So people using nested functions are not writing C?
No, no more than those who write `GOTO 10' are writing C.
Don't be so ridiculous.
Don't be daft.
Oh, and tell IBM.
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/lnxpcomp/v8v101/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.xlcpp8l.doc/language/ref/nested_functions.htm
Quoting from the above: "The language feature is an
extension to C89 and C99, implemented to facilitate porting
programs developed with GNU C."
I realise from your posting history that you like to be picky and
obstructive, but I am afraid they ARE writing C. It might not be "ISO
compliant C" (or whatever) but it is still C.
So Gnu supports them. IBM compilers them. Hey! Ring them up and tell
them it is "not C". It is C. Their C. Live with it.
.
- References:
- private functions
- From: Ronald Bruck
- Re: private functions
- From: Joachim Schmitz
- Re: private functions
- From: Richard
- Re: private functions
- From: Eric Sosman
- Re: private functions
- From: Richard
- Re: private functions
- From: Eric Sosman
- private functions
- Prev by Date: Re: private functions
- Next by Date: Re: Four or Two Bytes?
- Previous by thread: Re: private functions
- Next by thread: Re: private functions
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|