lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (Lawrence V. Cipriani) (04/06/88)
On page 53 of the rationale (or is that rationalization?) the first sentence of 3.5.3.1 says "A pointer declarator may NOW its own type qualifiers, to specify the ..." (emphasis mine). This seems messed up, any ideas for what the correct wording is? -- Larry Cipriani, AT&T Network Systems and Ohio State University Domain: lvc@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Path: ...!cbosgd!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!lvc (weird but right)
dsill@NSWC-OAS.arpa (Dave Sill) (04/07/88)
Larry Cipriani writes: >On page 53 of the rationale (or is that rationalization?) the >first sentence of 3.5.3.1 says "A pointer declarator may NOW its >own type qualifiers, to specify the ..." (emphasis mine). This >seems messed up, any ideas for what the correct wording is? How about: "A pointer declarator may now HAVE its own type qualifiers..." [Based on October '86 wording.] ========= The opinions expressed above are mine. "PostScript is the new ASCII." -- Bill Joy