M
mdh
Hi All,
There is a line in the discussion of K&R (section 7-5) that says ...
(end of 2nd paragraph, about the middle of the page)...in connection
with the description of getc and putc...that
"Like getchar and putchar, getc and putc may be macros instead of
functions"
Now, recently, I asked why va_list, va_arg, va_start etc were macros,
and the answers included these two insights from KT;
a function can't modify an argument.
 A C function cannot take 
a type name as an argument
<<<<<<<
Is the significance of this statement ( ie relating to putchar/
getchar) related to macros in va_list at all. And if not, what
significance/insight should I attribute to this statement?
Thanks as usual.
There is a line in the discussion of K&R (section 7-5) that says ...
(end of 2nd paragraph, about the middle of the page)...in connection
with the description of getc and putc...that
"Like getchar and putchar, getc and putc may be macros instead of
functions"
Now, recently, I asked why va_list, va_arg, va_start etc were macros,
and the answers included these two insights from KT;
a function can't modify an argument.
 A C function cannot take 
a type name as an argument
<<<<<<<
Is the significance of this statement ( ie relating to putchar/
getchar) related to macros in va_list at all. And if not, what
significance/insight should I attribute to this statement?
Thanks as usual.