Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?

On 7/12/24 11:46, Keith Thompson wrote:

bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
[...]

KT has chosen not to answer, and now you are evading it too. I'm
asking why this:
>
     void F(int* B) {}
>
is 'not C' according to KT.

 
I never said that's "not C".  It is in fact a perfectly valid function
definition.  And it's not the question you originally asked.

In your message dated 2024-07-11 13:29 -0700, you wrote:

The language could insist that you write:

 
   void F(int* B) {}
 
But it doesn't.  Why should we waste time in comp.lang.c explaining how
C *could* have been defined?  It's hard enough to explain how it
actually is defined, especially with your contributions.
>

This way, it is far clearer that a pointer is being passed, and 'pass
by value' now makes more sense. The way B will be used is now
consistent with the same declaration anywhere else.

 
But that's not C.

So you did say that something is not C, Bart has merely misidentified
what it is. "void F(int*B)" is C, and you never denied that it was.
Insisting that you write "void F(int*B)" - in other words, disallowing
"void F(int B[20])" - is not C, and that's you did say.