Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c:9218 comp.sys.ibm.pc:14369
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!necntc!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ISC.COM (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: cdecl keyword
Message-ID: <3430@haddock.ISC.COM>
Date: 12 Apr 88 17:03:51 GMT
References: <1238@wjvax.UUCP> <297@ho7cad.ATT.COM> <1242@wjvax.UUCP> <185@premise.ZONE1.COM> <7046@ki4pv.uucp> <5980@utcsri.UUCP>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Followup-To: comp.lang.c
Organization: Interactive Systems, Boston
Lines: 15

In article <5980@utcsri.UUCP> flaps@utcsri.UUCP (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
>tanner@ki4pv.uucp (T. Andrews) cited a compiler which [handles pre-defined
>variadic functions but not user-defined ones]
>
>Such a compiler would not correctly compile all correct C programs.  In C it
>is permissible to call any function (including user-defined ones) with the
>wrong number of arguments, so long as any arguments not actually passed are
>not accessed by the function being called.

I don't believe this has ever been guaranteed.  Dennis Ritchie recently
mentioned this as one of the internal inconsistencies of K&R C (variadic
functions are forbidden, yet printf exists).

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint
Followups to comp.lang.c only.