Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!sharkey!bnlux0!adelphi!promark!mark
From: mark@promark.UUCP (Mark J. DeFilippis)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.wizards
Subject: Re: Weird problem with C compiler under SCO - I can't believe it!
Summary: I blame SCO
Message-ID: <72@promark.UUCP>
Date: 17 Sep 89 17:03:22 GMT
References: <71@promark.UUCP> <95@uwm.edu>
Organization: Promark Data Concepts, Garden City, NY
Lines: 42

In article <95@uwm.edu>, chad@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (D. Chadwick Gibbons) writes:
> In article <71@promark.UUCP> mark@promark.UUCP (Mark J. DeFilippis) writes:
> |The following short section of code does not compile using SCO XENIX 2.3.1
> |and the 2.2.1 Development system, and I can't figure out why.
> |1 main()
> |2 {
> |3 	char *cdecl;
> |4 }
> 
> 	The token "cdecl" is a reserved word under most implementations of
> compilers developed for the Intel familiy of processors.  MicroSoft choosed to
> use this to determine if a given function name was a "pascal," "fortran," or
> C, i.e. "cdecl," function.

I thank you for pointing me in the proper direction.  Having worked mostly
in the unix enviroment I am starting to get an appreciation of the the
the portability problems going from a real UNIX environemnt to a xenix
environment.

> This convenction is followed by most DOS
> compilers, and MicroSoft continues to use it--and they make the compilers for
> SCO XENIX.  If you check the manual, there is a extended keyword flag
> introducing "pascal," "fortran," and "cdecl."  -Me will turn on these flags.

I will add, I did RTFM before the post, and the SCO manual for the release
I am using notes the near, far, huge, pascal and fortran keywords ONLY.
No mention is made of cdecl anywhere. ARGGGGGG!
Even in the C reference syntax summary they note only the above listed
identifiers may be keywords if the -Me flag is used.  I should have known
however that something like this was the cause.  It seems they make their
own standards.  I should have known I was in trouble as soon as I saw the
way they impliment variable number of parameters without even mentioning
a portability issue exists.

I hope that under SCO UNIX, these issues are eliminated.

Mark DeFilippis
-- 
Adelphi University, Garden City, NY 11530                   (516) 663-1170
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science
                                 markd@adelphi.UUCP  or  mark@promark.UUCP
                      UUCP:      ...philabs!sbcs!bnlux0!adelphi!markd