peter green wrote:
> I'm not convinced they had any choice at least if they wanted to
> remain
> C compliant. Afaict C varargs require the caller to do the removal
> because only the caller knows for sure how many parameters have been
> passed and due to the retarted way C handles prototypes you can't
> have a different interface for varargs and non-varargs functions.

Yes, variable numbers of arguments is a pain.  But let's keep this in
perspective.  This is a compiler for small embedded systems.  It's a lot
more important to be useful and efficient than a slave to some standard tha=
t
never considered this situation in the first place.

There are ways to handle variable numbers of arguments too.  I'm no C whiz,
but as I understand it, you know at compile time whether a function allows
variable numbers of arguments.  Using a caller clean model in the rare case
when someone uses such functions would be reasonable, even though there are
other ways.  But it makes no sense to pessimize the 99.5% case in favor of
the 0.5% case.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.