Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac,att!emory!gatech!udel!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: 3.7 constraints and 3.7.2 semantics
Keywords: external/tentative definitions, internal linkage
Message-ID: <15513@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 19 Mar 91 05:26:53 GMT
References: <5450@mcrware.UUCP>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 7

In article <5450@mcrware.UUCP> jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) writes:
>Does p.82, lines 13-15, imply that the following is not standard conforming,
>or does p.84, lines 31-34, provide an escape hatch?

I don't understand your question -- it's not an "escape hatch",
it's an essential specification that says the declaration in
your example really is a definition.