Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!think.com!paperboy!meissner From: meissner@osf.org (Michael Meissner) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: pointer sizes, was: Re: What does char **ch mean? Message-ID: Date: 20 May 91 20:53:42 GMT References: <1991May4.062007.3264@weyrich.UUCP> <16071@smoke.brl.mil> <466@smds.UUCP> Sender: news@OSF.ORG Organization: Open Software Foundation Lines: 19 In-reply-to: rh@smds.UUCP's message of 16 May 91 06:33:51 GMT In article <466@smds.UUCP> rh@smds.UUCP (Richard Harter) writes: | My observation is that funny architectures and such don't matter as long | as your code in lint clean -- you never see the problems because you follow | the rules that avoid the problems. However these fussy rules are only | for portability freaks. If your friend is only going to have one job in | his life, work on only one machine in his life, and only use one compiler | I see no reason why he should worry about these issues. In supporting a C compiler for a funny machine (the Data General MV/Eclipse), this is mostly true. The one exception is calls to qsort, bsearch, etc. where invariably the wrong type of pointer is passed to the comparison routine. Lint doesn't catch it because it loses the argument type information. -- Michael Meissner email: meissner@osf.org phone: 617-621-8861 Open Software Foundation, 11 Cambridge Center, Cambridge, MA, 02142 You are in a twisty little passage of standards, all conflicting.