From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: dave@horsfall.org (Dave Horsfall)
Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2014 02:04:33 +1100 (EST)
Subject: [TUHS] speaking of early C compilers
In-Reply-To: <1414417236.2834739.183752501.006CD61F@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <0F0B9BFC06289346B88512B91E55670D2F86@EXCHANGE>
 <255EF9E2-2BA3-4928-8664-7C7B08FB48D4@coraid.com>
 <5BDD9EB6-4F00-4C28-BC7F-4A264996A625@ronnatalie.com>
 <1414417236.2834739.183752501.006CD61F@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1410280159310.57132@aneurin.horsfall.org>

On Mon, 27 Oct 2014, random832 at fastmail.us wrote:

> Is there any reason this is superior to *(int *)0177776 [and e.g.
> #define integ(x) (*(int *)(x))]? Did casting not exist back then?

Type casts?  In a compiler/linker that supported e.g.:

int abort 4;

...

abort();

Thou jests...

-- 
Dave Horsfall (VK2KFU)  "Bliss is a MacBook with a FreeBSD server."
http://www.horsfall.org/spam.html (and check the home page whilst you're there)