Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!njin!princeton!notecnirp!nfs
From: nfs@notecnirp.Princeton.EDU (Norbert Schlenker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Zen and the Art of Library Programming
Summary: Look before you leap!
Message-ID: <22703@princeton.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 3 Jan 90 05:13:16 GMT
References: <22702@princeton.Princeton.EDU>
Sender: news@princeton.Princeton.EDU
Reply-To: nfs@notecnirp.UUCP (Norbert Schlenker)
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Princeton University
Lines: 12

In article <22702@princeton.Princeton.EDU> nfs@notecnirp.UUCP (Norbert Schlenker) writes:
>    (regarding the utility of static with the ACK C compiler)
>  Not as far as I know.  This is a sore point with me (and I assume many
>  others).  Eventually, there has got to be another ACK compiler that
>  fixes this very significant defect.

This just goes to show you that a little testing is always worthwhile.
(At least it saves you from having to extricate a foot from your mouth.)
I tried a static function ... lo and behold, it worked just fine.  When
was this fixed?

Norbert