Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!ncar!gatech!mcnc!decvax!decwrl!pyramid!prls!philabs!micomvax!zap!iros1!mcgill-vision!mouse
From: mouse@mcgill-vision.UUCP (der Mouse)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: parameter adjustment (was double indirection)
Message-ID: <979@mcgill-vision.UUCP>
Date: 9 Mar 88 09:54:57 GMT
References: <4292@rosevax.Rosemount.COM> <2292@umd5.umd.edu> <2305@umd5.umd.edu>
Organization: McGill University, Montreal
Lines: 20

In article <2305@umd5.umd.edu>, chris@trantor.umd.edu (Chris Torek) writes:
> In article <16940@watmath.waterloo.edu> rbutterworth@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ray Butterworth) writes:
>> C performs this "helpful" adjustment of the programmer's
>> misdeclaration with other parameters too. ...
>> sizeof args:   float=8  double=8  short=2  char=1  int[10]=4
>> sizeof autos:  float=4  double=8  short=2  char=1  int[10]=40
>> The "40" vs. the "4" shows the array parameter "adjustment".
> This one is `correct' according to the language definition;
>> And (float) is similarly adjusted form 4 to 8, since it is actually
>> passed as (double).
> but this one is just a bug.

I don't believe I just saw Chris say that.

K&R, page 186, fifth paragraph on that page.

					der Mouse

			uucp: mouse@mcgill-vision.uucp
			arpa: mouse@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu