Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: technology discussion =?utf-8?Q?=E2=86=92?= does the world need
 a "new" C ?
Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 08:46:44 -0700
Organization: None to speak of
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <871q3ytxy3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References: <v66eci$2qeee$1@dont-email.me> <877cdur1z9.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6joi4$1epoj$1@dont-email.me> <871q42qy33.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6k6i0$1h4d3$1@dont-email.me> <87ed82p28y.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6m03l$1tf05$1@dont-email.me> <87r0c1nzjj.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
	<v6m716$1urj4$1@dont-email.me> <86ikxd8czu.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<v6mggd$20g3f$1@dont-email.me> <20240710213910.00000afd@yahoo.com>
	<v6mm02$21cpb$1@dont-email.me> <865xtc87yo.fsf@linuxsc.com>
	<v6ol14$2fdrj$1@dont-email.me>
	<87msmnu5e3.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
	<v6pdcf$2jijk$1@dont-email.me>
	<87frsfu0yp.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
	<v6pfo3$2jijk$2@dont-email.me> <v6qgbt$2t6p7$1@dont-email.me>
	<v6r2im$30a9n$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Date: Fri, 12 Jul 2024 17:46:44 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f6a4ae00b1d1f7396bcd7741519ff487";
	logging-data="3252681"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19E7LEBdwFOFs+e3+Q1KAMa"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+DTbwwC9FSp+pMdV2h4YPVb344M=
	sha1:X5S3YZgaNv6PhqZGJ+nhfmxEeJE=
Bytes: 2056

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.

[...]

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */