Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!aplcen!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: X3J11 Pleasanton meeting summary
Message-ID: <14181@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 18 Oct 90 16:43:57 GMT
References: <7944:Oct906:02:0690@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> <14061@smoke.BRL.MIL> <14005:Oct1801:26:5890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 10

In article <14005:Oct1801:26:5890@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>In article <14061@smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>> In article <7944:Oct906:02:0690@kramden.acf.nyu.edu> brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein) writes:
>> >  x is of type char [100][3],    sizeof(x) is 400
>> Not permitted.  sizeof x is required to be 300.
>... is there any portable way to get around this restriction?

What on earth are you talking about?  It's a restriction on the
implementation, not on a program.  It actually guarantees MORE
semantics that portable programs can exploit.