Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site ho95b.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!ihnp4!houxm!ho95b!wcs
From: wcs@ho95b.UUCP (Bill Stewart)
Newsgroups: net.bugs.4bsd
Subject: Re: bug in lint (really - oldfashioned =op)
Message-ID: <313@ho95b.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 20-Feb-85 23:10:32 EST
Article-I.D.: ho95b.313
Posted: Wed Feb 20 23:10:32 1985
Date-Received: Fri, 22-Feb-85 09:29:47 EST
References: <376@harvard.ARPA> <466@rlgvax.UUCP> <2305@randvax.UUCP> <497@rlgvax.UUCP>
Distribution: net
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 30


	> As of System V, all the old syntax (initializers without "=", the "=+",
	> "=-", "=*", etc. operators) has, indeed, disappeared.  Anybody out there
	> with a S5 compiler care to try some of the guys that cause earlier PCCs to
	> drop core?
	> 
	> 	Guy Harris
	> 	{seismo,ihnp4,allegra}!rlgvax!guy

Unfortunately, the old =- is still with us in System V, sort of:
	main(){
		int j;
		j=5;
		j=-1;
		}
Under System V, both lint and cc complain that the j=-1 line is
ambiguous, and select the assignment-op.  Then they reject it, and
don't produce object code.

Under System V Rel 2, it finally lets you say j=-1; when you mean
	j = (-1);
- the lint comment is that the assignment is ambiguous, but the
unary-op is chosen, so it does it right this time.

			Bill Stewart 
P.S. I didn't remember the old init syntax, so I haven't tried it.
-- 
			Bill Stewart
			AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ 1-201-949-0705
			...!ihnp4!ho95b!wcs