AVR-Chat

On Tue, Feb 22, 2005 at 01:05:49PM -0500, Robert Adsett wrote:

"At 05:45 PM 2/22/05 +0000, kc9dag wrote:
[..]
>
>for this chunk of code:
>
>45  for(unsigned int x = 0; x <= pagecount; x++)

This would be valid C++ but not C"

Actually this is valid ANSI C (C99), but not valid ex-ANSI C (C89) nor 
valid K & R C.

">46  {
>47      Page_To_Buffer(x, 1);
>48      for(unsigned int inty = 0, inty < 0xFF; inty++)

This would be valid C++ but not C"

How so?

"[..]

A copy of K&R or Harbison &  Steele  wouldn't go awry for covering these 
sort of details."

Such books could leave someone misinformed and out of date, though 
actually I am ignorant of Harbison & Steele so if their book was 
published this decade it may be current.

Regards,
Colin Paul