Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!homxb!mhuxt!mhuxm!mhuxo!ulysses!sfmag!sfsup!mpl
From: mpl@sfsup.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Writing readable code
Message-ID: <1728@sfsup.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 31-Jul-87 17:09:48 EDT
Article-I.D.: sfsup.1728
Posted: Fri Jul 31 17:09:48 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 2-Aug-87 10:27:16 EDT
References: <1158@copper.TEK.COM> <6858@auspyr.UUCP> <17171@cca.CCA.COM> <24246@sun.uucp>
Organization: AT&T-IS, Summit N.J. USA
Lines: 59
Summary: portability

In article <24246@sun.uucp>, guy%gorodish@Sun.COM (Guy Harris) writes:
> > 	Oddly enough, by definition what you have used above is a valid
> > construct on just about every machine I have ever seen.
> 
> "valid", yes, in the sense that the C compiler won't reject it; it may
> give you a warning, but it won't reject it.
	[deleted stuff]
> 	main()
> 	{
> 		int c = 'a';
> 
> 		write(1, &c, 1);
> 	}

So, the point is (if I remember the original article correctly) that
one should use:

	main()
	{
		int	i;
		char	c;

		while ((i = getchar()) != EOF) {
			c = i;
			write(1, &c, 1);
		}
	}

perhaps.  However, why not use the (more efficient) code:

	main()
	{
		int	i;

		while ((i = getchar()) != EOF)
			putchar(i);
	}

I mean, I think this all stemmed from an early reply to the original article
which claimed you *needed* an intermediate variable (i) no matter *what*
you wanted to do with the character.  For code like this "write" business
an intermediate (c) might be useful, but you can still do without in a
better fashion.  How about:

	#include	<sys/param.h>

	main()
	{
		int	i;

		while ((i = getchar()) != EOF)
			write(1, lobyte(loword(i)), 1);
	}

ANSI C promises to be better at providing standard macros like this as well.
So....
Happy hacking!

Mike