[TUHS] origins of void* -- Apology!

Nemo cym224 at gmail.com
Thu Nov 9 02:07:10 AEST 2017

On 6 November 2017 at 19:36, Ron Natalie <ron at ronnatalie.com> wrote:
> It’s worse than that.   “char” is defined as neither signed nor unsigned.
> The signedness is implementation defined.    This was why we have the inane
> “signed” keyword.

What was that story about porting an early UNIX to a machine with
different char polarity?  I dimly recall only a few problems.


More information about the TUHS mailing list