Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!sunic!liuida!prosys!ath
From: ath@prosys.se (Anders Thulin)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: float VS double: The return...
Message-ID: <460@helios.prosys.se>
Date: 11 Apr 90 06:15:47 GMT
References: <16383@nigel.udel.EDU> <29812@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Organization: Programsystem AB, Teknikringen 2A, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden
Lines: 31

In article <29812@amdcad.AMD.COM> tim@amd.com (Tim Olson) writes:
>
>  [ quote ANSI Rationale deleted ]
>
>This means that in:
>
>f(c, f)
>char c;
>float f;
>{
>	.
>	.
>sizeof c should be 1 and sizeof f should be equal to sizeof(float).

No. The ANSI C standard also tries very hard not to introduce backward
incompabilities.  The example above works just the way K&R says:
c becomes an int, and f a double by widening, provided there isn't
a new-style definition of f lurking in some corner.

In the presence of a new-style definition, like

	f(char c, float f);

c would indeed be a char and f a float. 

I can't quote the ANSI gospel, but K&R, 2nd ed, Section A7.3.2 Function
calls, p.201-202 provides more info.

-- 
Anders Thulin		ath@prosys.se   {uunet,mcsun}!sunic!prosys!ath
Telelogic Programsystem AB, Teknikringen 2B, S-583 30 Linkoping, Sweden