Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!spdcc!ima!haddock!karl
From: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: types of optional arguments in stdarg.h
Message-ID: <7132@haddock.ima.isc.com>
Date: 7 Sep 88 19:14:07 GMT
References: <438@ucsvc.unimelb.edu.au> <1067@xyzzy.UUCP> <20738@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: karl@haddock.ima.isc.com (Karl Heuer)
Organization: Interactive Systems, Boston
Lines: 19

rbutterworth@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ray Butterworth) writes:
>[proposal for some future version of the Standard:]
>extern void func(type1, type2, ...);  /* usual meaning */
>extern void func(type1, type2  ...);  /* no trailing comma */
>The missing comma would indicate that all the optional "..." args
>must have the same type as the [last declared] argument.

I independently came up with this same idea.  I think the concept is right,
but the syntax is lousy -- it's too easy to add/delete that comma and
accidentally change the meaning of the declaration.

Also, in C++ the comma is optional (Bjarne wanted it to be forbidden, but
X3J11 made him fix it).  It would not be wise to make a syntax change to C
that is in direct conflict with existing practice in C++.

(Meanwhile, lobby your lint vendor for a /*MONOMORPHIC*/ lintpragma that will
check this for you.)

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint