Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!caip!lll-crg!hoptoad!farren
From: farren@hoptoad.uucp (Mike Farren)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: expr?(void):(void)
Message-ID: <927@hoptoad.uucp>
Date: Fri, 1-Aug-86 01:10:29 EDT
Article-I.D.: hoptoad.927
Posted: Fri Aug  1 01:10:29 1986
Date-Received: Sat, 2-Aug-86 07:28:43 EDT
References: <501@bunny.UUCP> <500@copper.UUCP> <273@watmath.UUCP> <5826@think.COM> <3502@amdahl.UUCP>
Reply-To: farren@hoptoad.UUCP (Mike Farren)
Distribution: net
Organization: Nebula Consultants in San Francisco
Lines: 13

I don't know - maybe I'm just slow.  My understanding was that the reason for
the existence of "void" was to indicate to the compiler that a function did
not return a value, therefore no provisions need be taken to supply one, 
potentially freeing up a register.  Is this wrong?  At any rate, you can
replace the "expr?(void):(void)" construction with something on the order of
"if(expr)(void); else (void);" with only a slight increase in keystrokes,
and make your compiler a lot happier.


-- 
----------------
Mike Farren
hoptoad!farren   "Tickle my funnybone!"