Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!drutx!houxe!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!cornell!uw-beaver!tektronix!hplabs!hpda!fortune!amd!decwrl!decvax!cca!ima!ism780b!jim
From: jim@ism780b.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: K&R App A, par. 8 & 8.2, on Declarat - (nf)
Message-ID: <8@ism780b.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 1-Aug-84 00:26:15 EDT
Article-I.D.: ism780b.8
Posted: Wed Aug  1 00:26:15 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 22-Jul-84 03:02:47 EDT
Lines: 25

#R:log-hb:-18000:ism780b:25500002:000:686
ism780b!jim    Jul 13 19:35:00 1984

> I agree that "a = 1;" should be a valid global declaration, but see
> nothing wrong with it as a local one.  The statements "int a=1;"
> "int a; a = 1;" and "a = 1;" should all produce equivalent code!
> This is because of the way C handles initialization of automatic
> local variables.  The only problem I can see is in letting the
> compiler tell where the declarations end and the statements begin.
> If you allow this as a valid declaration, that's not a problem.

int a = 2;
main() {
	a = 1;

	x();
}
x() {
	printf("%d\n", a);
}

will print "2" if "a = 1" is a declaration,
"1" if it is an assignment (current, expected, behavior).

-- Jim Balter, INTERACTIVE Systems (ima!jim)