From: tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com   
      
   Keith Thompson  writes:   
      
   > Tim Rentsch  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.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)