Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site amdahl.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!decvax!decwrl!sun!amdahl!gam
From: gam@amdahl.UUCP (Gordon A. Moffett)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: gripe: variable arg lists
Message-ID: <531@amdahl.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 18-Nov-84 03:08:41 EST
Article-I.D.: amdahl.531
Posted: Sun Nov 18 03:08:41 1984
Date-Received: Mon, 19-Nov-84 03:39:48 EST
References: <348@gitpyr.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: Amdahl Corp, Sunnyvale CA
Lines: 23

Robert Viduya (gatech!gitpyr!robert) writes:

> I'm not defending the author  of  the  program.   He  shouldn't  have  used
> _doprnt() [ for variable-length arglists ] as it is an internal
> function of the standard C library and there
> isn't any guarantee that it will be in some future revision of  the  OpSys.
> However,  if C had a standard method of supporting variable-length argument
> lists, he probably wouldn't have resorted to using _doprnt().
> 
> Anyway, put  this  message  down  as  another  reason  to  standardize  the
> language,  especially  the intentionally vague areas like variable-argument
> lists.

But is it necessary to tie this into the language?  Both System V and
BSD have varargs.h, does this not provide portable variable-arglist
functions?

(System V also provides a vprintf(3), which is used with varargs.h
 and works similarly to _doprnt()).
-- 
Gordon A. Moffett		...!{ihnp4,hplabs,amd,nsc}!amdahl!gam

37 22'50" N / 122 59'12" W	[ This is just me talking. ]