Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!utcs!lsuc!pesnta!amdcad!decwrl!ucbvax!info-vax
From: info-vax@ucbvax.ARPA
Newsgroups: fa.info-vax
Subject: DEC C (2.0)
Message-ID: <4966@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Wed, 20-Feb-85 11:16:07 EST
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.4966
Posted: Wed Feb 20 11:16:07 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 20-Feb-85 20:36:16 EST
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.ARPA
Organization: University of California at Berkeley
Lines: 15

From: Gail Rubin <grubin@bbn-spca>

If you ever get a response to your SPR on the "address of arguments" problem,
I would be interested in hearing about it. We currently use Whitesmith's
C but we may decide to switch to DEC C, but not with this bug in it.
I have one application that has a large number of routines which, as the
first thing they do, is figure out how many arguments they were called with
by taking the address of the first argument, subtracting 4, and using that
as a pointer to the number of arguments. It sounds like DEC C version 2.0
would break this. [Is there some other "approved" way, from C, of determining
number of arguments?]

-- Gail Rubin
(grubin@bbn-spca or @bbn-unix)