Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!cbnewse!cbnewsd!knudsen
From: knudsen@cbnewsd.att.com (michael.j.knudsen)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os9
Subject: Re: OSK C Compiler problem with No. of Args
Keywords: OSK, C
Message-ID: <1991Apr29.222340.4657@cbnewsd.att.com>
Date: 29 Apr 91 22:23:40 GMT
References: <1991Apr25.174038.7834@cbnewsd.att.com> <195@blars>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories
Lines: 28

In article <195@blars>, blarson@blars writes:
> More is definatly OK, and if you want to do a variable number I
> strongly recomend my varargs.h.  (Smilodon.cs.wisc.edu has at least

I saw a varargs.h once and just about choked looking at the size
and complexity.  And I can't get stuff from smilodon, etc.
Tho I appreciate the suggestion, thanks.

Variable numober of args works simply in the 6809 compiler since
the args are pushed in right-left order.  And should work just as
well in 68K once D0 and D1 get used up.  Yes, I know that double
floats take up two positions.

Incidentally, the 6809 printf() calls just push the args on,
no special varargs.h stuff.

> Any more???  Useing this sloppy programming practice was taking
> advantage of a compier bug, (that it didn't diagnose the condition) and
> never should have been counted on.

Not a bug, just the obvious, elegant, simple way that 6809 works.
And even the OSK compiler (which tries to play Lint, and has caught
some nasty stuff for me) could'nt catch this if it's spread across
multiple source files.
-- 
"What America needs is A Thousand Points When Lit..."

	knudsen@iceland.att.com