Re: question about linker

On 12/18/24 19:35, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

On 18.12.2024 22:04, James Kuyper wrote:

On 12/12/24 06:38, Janis Papanagnou wrote:

[...]

>
My copy of K&R 1st edition has nothing remotely resembling that.

 
I think someone here already mentioned that the English version
looks different compared to the translation I've in my bookshelf.
(So I am not sure what your post is actually intending.[*])> (But that's anyway unimportant to the point I made; that you can
define semantical information like the precedence separately or
by syntax.[**])
 
Janis
 
PS: FYI; Some of your posts, James, arrive also in my mailbox.

Yes, as I've explained before, in April, 2021, Thunderbird changed from
having a Reply button that sends the response to the newsgroup, to
having a Followup button that does the same thing, and a Reply button
that sends the response by e-mail to the author. I spent a couple of
decades learning to hit the Reply button, and at 66 years of age, after
three years, I'm still finding it difficult to unlearn that habit,
though I've made some progress.

[*] I've put (if you're interested) a scan of that page uploaded
here: http://volatile.gridbug.de/KR_syntax-rotated90.pdf
(But similar syntaxes for expressions can be found also in other
programming languages' contexts; see below.)

It's not just that it "looks different". It is substantially different
from the First Edition, which had "expression binop expression" as one
of the rules for expression, with a precedence table for binop. It is
also substantially different from the second edition, which closely
matched C89, with a separate grammar production for each level of
precedence. Nor does it look like a plausible intermediate step between
those formulations, which is roughly how you described it.