From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 10a146,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid10a146,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,8775b19e3c68a5dc X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fa0ae,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gidfa0ae,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1094ba,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1094ba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,a03ae7f4e53958e1 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public From: Patricia Shanahan Subject: Re: Which language pays most? Smalltalk, not C++ nor Java. Date: 1998/01/03 Message-ID: <34AF26C0.E51A3E46@acm.org>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 312595621 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit References: <34A8C6CC.3EC74017@acm.org> <883858967snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Organization: Who? Me? Organized? Mime-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.java.programmer,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.perl.misc,comp.lang.ada,comp.edu Date: 1998-01-03T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Lawrence Kirby wrote: > > In article <34A8C6CC.3EC74017@acm.org> pats@acm.org "Patricia Shanahan" writes: > > >Lawrence Kirby wrote: > >> > >> In article <34A812F9.C169A703@its.cl> gschwarz@its.cl "Guillermo Schwarz" > > writes: > >... > >> >The point is, at least when I studied the good and old K&R, it didn't mention>> > > >> >"reserved as identifiers with external linkage", that for me means "don't > >> >touch this, > >> >or trick"... > >> > >> K&R2 doesn't define the language. It is an excellent book but there do seem to>> be a few things it doesn't cover properly. The index lists "reserved words" > >> but that just seems to refer to keywords. Even though it was revised after > >> the standard was released it seems to be based mainly on a draft standard. > >... > > > >"good and old K&R" may be K&R1, not K&R2. > > You may be right. I though it was probably K&R2 because C just wasn't defined > that formally in the days of K&R1 so talking about "reserved as identifiers > with external linkage" in that context doesn't make much sense. > > -- > ----------------------------------------- > Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk > Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com > ----------------------------------------- Note that "good and old K&R" is described as NOT mentioning "reserved as identifiers with external linkage".