Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ames!sgi!zok!wattres!steve
From: steve@wattres.UUCP (Steve Watt)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: DEFINITE bug in Turbo C 2.0
Message-ID: <451@wattres.UUCP>
Date: 23 Mar 90 04:40:46 GMT
References: <802@zeusa.UUCP>
Reply-To: steve@wattres.UUCP (Steve Watt)
Organization: Steven Watt, Consultant
Lines: 45

In article <802@zeusa.UUCP> hendrik@zeusa.UUCP (Hendrik Vermooten) writes:
>Here is a definite bug in C (discovered by Renier v. Wyk)
>Run by Turbo C it gives:
>
>144
>100
>132
>110
>
>And run by Microsoft C (under XENIX):
>
>132
>110
>132
>110
>
Some more votes:
Microsoft C under SCO UNIX gives
132 110
132 110

AT&T C under SCO UNIX gives
132 110
132 110

cc under Ultrix gives
144 100
144 110 (?)

VAX C under Ultrix gives
144 110
144 110

cc on the DECStation gives
144 100
144 100

Interesting...
I would be inclined to agree with Microsoft's interpretation...
but I can sure understand most of the others, except for cc under Ultrix
giving different answers based on whether or not it's a function call.
-- 
Steve Watt
...!claris!wattres!steve		wattres!steve@claris.com also works
If you torture your data long enough, it'll eventually confess.