Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Path: utzoo!henry
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Subject: Re: C declaration grammar
Message-ID: <1990Aug7.173830.3110@zoo.toronto.edu>
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
References: <1990Aug7.012657.8398@NCoast.ORG>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 90 17:38:30 GMT

In article <1990Aug7.012657.8398@NCoast.ORG> ramsey@NCoast.ORG (Cedric Ramsey) writes:
>... The production doesn't 
>specify any precedence or order for what should be seen first. For instance, 
>according to this grammar, the following declarations:
>
>const char static i; or 
>static const char i; or
>static char const i;
>
>All would be valid...

They are indeed all valid.  Furthermore, they all mean exactly the same
thing, so there is no question of "precedence" involved.  Many people
would consider only the middle one to be good style, mind you, and ANSI
has hinted that the first one might become illegal eventually (i.e. the
storage class would be required to be first).
-- 
The 486 is to a modern CPU as a Jules  | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
Verne reprint is to a modern SF novel. |  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry