Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Andrew Reilly, post: 2453576"] I haven't used an AS/400 myself, either, but this is almost certainly the sort of perfectly reasonable code that the standard has arranged to be undefined, precicely so that it can be said that there's a C compiler for that system. Given the hardware behaviour, it would have been vastly preferable for the compiler to handle pointers as base+offset pairs, so that the specialness of the hardware pointers didn't interfere with the logic of the program. Since most coding for AS/400s were (is still?) done in COBOL and PL/1, both of which are perfectly suited to the hardware's two-dimensional memory, any performance degredation would hardly have been noticed. (And since AS/400s are actually Power processors with a JIT over the top now, there would likely not be a performance problem from doing it "right" anyway.) But no, your friend had to go and modify good code, and risk introducing bugs in the process. [/QUOTE]