Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!adm!OWENSJ%VTVM1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU
From: OWENSJ%VTVM1.BITNET@CUNYVM.CUNY.EDU (John Owens)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Clarifications on ANSI C nits
Message-ID: <11032@brl-adm.ARPA>
Date: 29 Dec 87 19:29:39 GMT
Sender: news@brl-adm.ARPA
Lines: 16

[Michael Condict suggests allowing declaration syntax, separated by
 semicolons, in the function definition argument lists.]

While this may sound clean from a language-design perspective, it
makes the resulting definitions harder to use.  With the current
proposed syntax, someone wanting to know the types and number of
arguments can see them easily, separated by commas, just as they
are specified in the calling sequence.  Michael's syntax would
lose the one-to-one correspondence both with the calling sequence
*and* the function prototypes.  I think this correspondence is
important to preserve, unless we want to see C go the way of
Algol 68....

        -John Owens                     +1 703 961 7827
        Virginia Tech   Communications Network Services
        OWENSJ@VTVM1.CC.VT.EDU      OWENSJ@VTVM1.BITNET