Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!deccrl!news.crl.dec.com!shlump.nac.dec.com!tkou02.enet.dec.com!jit345!diamond
From: diamond@jit345.swstokyo.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: no type-specifier ==> int
Message-ID: <1991Mar22.010008.17703@tkou02.enet.dec.com>
Date: 22 Mar 91 01:00:08 GMT
References: <3119@inews.intel.com>
Sender: news@tkou02.enet.dec.com (USENET News System)
Reply-To: diamond@jit345.enet@tkou02.enet.dec.com (Norman Diamond)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation Japan , Tokyo
Lines: 12

In article <3119@inews.intel.com> bhoughto@hopi.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton) writes:

>Anyone see more verbose evidence that a blank
>type-specifier indicates type-specifier `int' than the two
>instances of, "or no type specifiers," at (ANSI X3.159-1989,
>sec. 3.5.2, p. 60, ll. 11 and 26)?

I don't.  But I think that line 11 (along with the text at the beginning
of the section) is sufficiently verbose for this purpose.
--
Norman Diamond       diamond@tkov50.enet.dec.com
If this were the company's opinion, I wouldn't be allowed to post it.