Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!rochester!cornell!uw-beaver!mit-eddie!husc6!ut-sally!im4u!halley!bc
From: bc@halley.UUCP (Bill Crews)
Newsgroups: comp.sources.bugs
Subject: Re: pointer checking
Keywords: 16 bits vs 32 bits
Message-ID: <326@halley.UUCP>
Date: 21 Feb 88 06:07:49 GMT
References: <228@gandalf.littlei.UUCP> <4626@teddy.UUCP> <20432@amdcad.AMD.COM>
Reply-To: bc@halley.UUCP (Bill Crews)
Organization: Tandem Computers, Austin, TX
Lines: 21

In article <20432@amdcad.AMD.COM> phil@amdcad.UUCP (Phil Ngai) writes:
>In article <228@gandalf.littlei.UUCP> martin@littlei.UUCP (martin) writes:
>>I do not want to start another net wars, but I am tired of seeing
>>people write programs that are non-portable between C compilers.
>
>The problem is not in the program but in your compiler and/or your
>understanding of C. But I shouldn't be surprised, considering that you
>are posting from an Intel site, you're probably using a brain-damaged
>processor. It wouldn't be an 8088, would it?

I am trying to discourage this discussion in this group, but I must correct the
misimpression created by your article.  While I am certainly no fan of Intel
processor architectures, martin's example of if(ptr) is not a problem on any of
the C compilers I have ever used on Intel machines (Microsoft, Lattice, DeSmet,
etc).  If it were, the compiler would not be for the C language.

-bc
-- 
Bill Crews                                   Tandem Computers
bc@halley.UUCP                               Austin, Texas
..!rutgers!im4u!halley!bc                    (512) 244-8350