James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:

On 5/14/25 07:00, David Brown wrote:
...

My interpretation matches yours. I can't find any indication in the
standard of a definition of what an "array" actually means

This is a problem with all of the derived types (6.2.5p25). There are definitions of the terms "array type", "structure type:, "union type", "function type", and "pointer type", but no definitions of the things
that those types are types of. My interpretation is that for each of
those object types, "X" is short-hand for "an object of X type".
[...]

That interpretation is not consistent with usage in the standard.
There are at least dozens of places, and probably hundreds of
places, where the C standard refers to pointers, structs, or unions,
but where there is no object. An easy example is the address-of
operator, &. The expression &<something> gives a pointer value, but
just by itself there is no pointer object.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.2
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
[...]

It isn't just that checking the condition cannot be done in general.
To be reliable the parameter length information would need to be
part of the function's type. That has implications for type
compatibility and also for the types of pointers-to-function. And
it would mean that removing a 'static' array length specification on
a function definition would necessitate also changing the functions
declarations, plus any affected pointers-to-function. Not worth it,
even if in theory it were doable.

[...]

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might not
require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.6
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

[...]

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might not
require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

I posted an opinion, clearly marked as my opinion. More than
eight months later, you felt the need to post a followup vaguely
expressing your opinion on my opinion.

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

--- PyGate Linux v1.5.6
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 28/01/2026 17:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might not
require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

That's an ironically appropriate use of "this". If you'd said "that" it wouldn't have been true.


--
Tristan Wibberley

The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 Tristan Wibberley except
citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,
of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it
verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to
promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation
of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general
superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train
any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that
will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On 29/01/2026 00:42, Keith Thompson wrote:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

[...]

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might not
require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

I posted an opinion, clearly marked as my opinion. More than
eight months later, you felt the need to post a followup vaguely
expressing your opinion on my opinion.

You two are awesome at stating mere facts.
I state that.

--
Tristan Wibberley

The message body is Copyright (C) 2026 Tristan Wibberley except
citations and quotations noted. All Rights Reserved except that you may,
of course, cite it academically giving credit to me, distribute it
verbatim as part of a usenet system or its archives, and use it to
promote my greatness and general superiority without misrepresentation
of my opinions other than my opinion of my greatness and general
superiority which you _may_ misrepresent. You definitely MAY NOT train
any production AI system with it but you may train experimental AI that
will only be used for evaluation of the AI methods it implements.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:53:09 +0000
Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk>
wrote:

On 28/01/2026 17:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might not
require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

That's an ironically appropriate use of "this". If you'd said "that"
it wouldn't have been true.

Care to elaborate for the benifit of non-native English readers?
Personally, in this particular context, I don't see how 'this' carries different meaning from 'that'.



--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:53:09 +0000
Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk>
wrote:

On 28/01/2026 17:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might not
require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

That's an ironically appropriate use of "this". If you'd said "that"
it wouldn't have been true.

Care to elaborate for the benifit of non-native English readers?
Personally, in this particular context, I don't see how 'this' carries >different meaning from 'that'.

English is often ambiguous. 'This' in the context of Tim's
response is ambiguous and could be interpreted to refer to
Tim's response itself, rather than to Keith's statement.


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)

On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 18:33:28 GMT
scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) wrote:

Michael S <already5chosen@yahoo.com> writes:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2026 03:53:09 +0000
Tristan Wibberley
<tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> wrote:

On 28/01/2026 17:54, Tim Rentsch wrote:

Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:

In my opinion, keeping a function's definition and declarations
consistent is absolutely worth it, even if the language might
not require it.

Without some sort of accompanying rationale, this unadorned
statement of opinion conveys no useful information.

That's an ironically appropriate use of "this". If you'd said
"that" it wouldn't have been true.

Care to elaborate for the benifit of non-native English readers? >Personally, in this particular context, I don't see how 'this'
carries different meaning from 'that'.

English is often ambiguous. 'This' in the context of Tim's
response is ambiguous and could be interpreted to refer to
Tim's response itself, rather than to Keith's statement.

Thank you


--- PyGate Linux v1.5.8
* Origin: Dragon's Lair, PyGate NNTP<>Fido Gate (3:633/10)