Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!psuvax1!hsdndev!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Is va_list defined by <stdio.h>?
Message-ID: <15781@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 10 Apr 91 04:47:21 GMT
References: <16863@hoptoad.uucp> <11852@dog.ee.lbl.gov> <16965@hoptoad.uucp>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <16965@hoptoad.uucp> gnu@hoptoad.uucp (John Gilmore) writes:
>I believe that ANSI C should not have forced us to introduce these two
>new problems.  In other words, this is a botch in the standard, that
>should be fixed in its next revision.  Preferably the fix will simply
>permit <stdio.h> to define va_list, or indeed, for it to include
><stdarg.h>, so that no backdoor monkeyshines at all would be needed.

Many of the top C experts in the world disagreed with you.
I think the standard has this exactly right.
However, it does look like 4.4BSD has an awkward implementation.
That's not the fault of the standard.