Re: OS/2 Patches (4)

[Paul Eggert]

> From: Andreas Buening <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 01:03:13 +0100
> 
> For that legend I referred to
> http://www-ccs.ucsd.edu/c/declare.html#Linkage which claims to rely
> on ISO/IEC 9899:1990.

We've never run into linkers that bad, and we probably never will, so
we shouldn't start worrying about that old C89 rule now.  There are
many more important things to worry about.

> This I don't understand. If the initial value of that variable
> is indeterminate why should anybody use this feature?

There must be some misunderstanding here, as the initial value of
program_name is determinate.

Also, there seems to be some misunderstanding in
<http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-gnu-utils/2002-November/003535.html>
as well.  Of its example you write "this is standard compliant C
code", but that code does not conform strictly to the C Standard since
it contains incompatible declarations for the same object.  Its
behavior is undefined.