Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: ANSI stdargs vs. UNIX varargs
Message-ID: <6033@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 28-Jun-87 21:30:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6033
Posted: Sun Jun 28 21:30:31 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 28-Jun-87 23:46:09 EDT
References: <164@delftcc.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11
Keywords: varargs stdarg portability

In article <164@delftcc.UUCP> henry@delftcc.UUCP (Henry Rabinowitz) writes:
>ANSI stdargs is supposed to be based on UNIX varargs, but ANSI version
>seems to require at least one fixed argument, if I read the spec correctly.
>Why is this an improvement?
>On what grounds does ANSI stdargs choose to break the existing varargs
>code, or is there an easy way to move from varargs to stdarg.

Read the X3.159-198x Rationale document for answers to questions like this.
Be assured that if <varargs.h> had been suitable for the standard, it would
have been adopted.  Unfortunately it doesn't work for some architectures,
according to representations made by some X3J11 committee members.