Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!princeton!caip!seismo!cmcl2!philabs!rdin!delftcc!sam
From: sam@delftcc.UUCP (Sam Kendall)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: double (*parray[15])[];
Message-ID: <146@delftcc.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 28-May-86 15:03:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: delftcc.146
Posted: Wed May 28 15:03:27 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 31-May-86 06:44:51 EDT
References: <200@pyuxv.UUCP> <1181@ncoast.UUCP> <350@dg_rtp.UUCP> <3423@ukma.UUCP> <367@dg_rtp.UUCP>
Organization: Delft Consulting Corp., New York
Lines: 14
Summary: type (*)[] is legal according to K&R

In article <367@dg_rtp.UUCP>, throopw@dg_rtp.UUCP writes:
> (I will note that, despite the H&S quote above, the legitimacy of the
>  (*)[] declaration with unknown size is not totally clear, but most
>  compilers and typecheckers side with me on this.)

So does K&R.  If anybody wants to argue with me on this, I'll find the
section number.  Basically, the statement on empty brackets is this: in
a sequence of contiguous `[ ]' pairs, only the first `[ ]' can be
empty.  But nowhere is it stated that the empty brackets have to be the
first type modifier.  So `type (*)[]' is okay.

----
Sam Kendall			{ ihnp4 | seismo!cmcl2 }!delftcc!sam
Delft Consulting Corp.		ARPA: delftcc!sam@NYU.ARPA