Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!mcvax!mhres!jv
From: jv@mhres.UUCP (Johan Vromans)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: pointer debate raging on...
Message-ID: <899@mhres.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 1-May-87 17:04:14 EDT
Article-I.D.: mhres.899
Posted: Fri May  1 17:04:14 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 3-May-87 03:55:44 EDT
References: <149@sds.UUCP> <31@thirdi.UUCP> <17498@sun.uucp>
Organization: Multihouse NV, the Netherlands
Lines: 17
Keywords: pointers, religion, sin, Ritchie, razor blades, etc.
Summary: lint?

In article <17498@sun.uucp>, guy%gorodish@Sun.COM (Guy Harris) writes:
> I worked for several years on a machine where sizeof(int) !=
> sizeof(char *), and where NULL was defined as 0, as it should be.
> Incorrect C programs did not work, but so what?  Correct C programs
> worked correctly.  Yes, it took some work to make some programs pass
> "lint", but you ended up with better programs afterwards; "lint"
> would sometimes even uncover bugs in those programs.

I have had the bad experience that, on Xenix systems, lint performs its
task assuming the small memory model (sizeof int == sizeof char). If your
program is going to use large model (sizeof int != sizeof char), lint
doesn't help ..... there is no way to tell lint to check with regard to
another memory model.
-- 

Johan Vromans @ Multihouse Research, Gouda, the Netherlands
      uucp: ..{seismo!}mcvax!mhres!jv