20 Dec
2016
20 Dec
'16
7:44 p.m.
From: "Ron Natalie"
At some point .. and the ability to assign/pass
structures got
supported, though I thought that was the compiler that came with V7.
That is my vague recollection too.
I'm still annoyed they didn't fix arrays
when they fixed structs.
Which aspect? The ability to assign/pass/return arrays, or the funky way that
array naming worked (I'm trying to remember the details, I think it was
something to do with 'arrays' passed as arguments - it was actually a pointer
that was passed, but the declaration didn't have to say 'pointer').
Noel
21 Dec
21 Dec
12:40 a.m.
New subject: nm on Third Edition .o files?'
I was referring to the fact that arrays sometimes are types and sometimes
dissolve into pointers to their first elements. It's a kludgy concept.
Assignment of array objects or passing/returning them should have been
really implemented at the same time sturct passing/return/assignment was
done.
The fact that a function that appears to pass/take array arguments magically
converts to pointers is kludgy.
-----Original Message-----
From: TUHS [mailto:tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org] On Behalf Of Noel Chiappa
Sent: Tuesday, December 20, 2016 1:45 PM
To: tuhs(a)minnie.tuhs.org
Cc: jnc(a)mercury.lcs.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [TUHS] nm on Third Edition .o files?'
From: "Ron Natalie"
At some point .. and the ability to assign/pass
structures got
supported, though I thought that was the compiler that came with V7.
That is my vague recollection too.
I'm still annoyed they didn't fix arrays
when they fixed structs.
Which aspect? The ability to assign/pass/return arrays, or the funky way
that array naming worked (I'm trying to remember the details, I think it was
something to do with 'arrays' passed as arguments - it was actually a
pointer that was passed, but the declaration didn't have to say
'pointer').
Noel
2891
days inactive
2891
days old
1 comments
2 participants
participants (2)
-
jnc＠mercury.lcs.mit.edu -
Ron Natalie