Xref: utzoo comp.std.c:4183 comp.std.c++:549
Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!hybrid!scifi!bywater!uunet!ithaca!garry
From: garry@ithaca.uucp (Garry Wiegand)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c,comp.std.c++
Subject: functions within functions
Message-ID: <1991Jan22.081057.8567@ithaca.uucp>
Date: 22 Jan 91 08:10:57 GMT
Organization: Ithaca Software
Lines: 35

When the C standards committee was meeting, did they discuss allowing 
the declaration of functions within functions? Ie, making:

    void outside(void) { 
    	static void inside(void) {}
       	inside(); 
    }

count as legal C? Neither my quasi-Ansi C nor my g++ compiler will
accept it.

The name-space advantages should be obvious, and as far as I can
see the syntax and semantics are clear and unambiguous, with no
unfortunate side effects. (Except: I'm not sure if the word "static"
would have any meaning in the context.)  

So I'm guessing that if they thought about it they must have decided 
not to break old compilers that were strongly "moded" inside. Or
that there was some theological argument. Does anyone know? 

Put it on the list for next time. 

(The prohibition in C++ seems silly considering that a simple wrapper:

    void outside(void) {
        class wrapper {public:
            static void inside(void){}
        };
        wrapper::inside();
    }

turns it into a legal program.)

Garry Wiegand    ---    Ithaca Software, Alameda, California
...!uunet!ithaca!garry, garry%ithaca.uucp@uunet.uu.net