| ??? 11/23/01 10:06 Read: times |
#16849 - RE: Keil\'s 6.20c comments - Craig |
"The correct operation for a 'C' compiler that encounters a single-line comment of // is for the compiler to ignore absolutely everything that follows on that line, up to and including the next CR/LF. It is not important whether there is a line-continuation sign at the end of the line because the compiler should ignore it--and everything else that follows //."
But K&R specifically lists line-splicing (the backslash thing) as occurring before comment removal - so a backslash on the end of a // comment should have the effect of splicing the next line into the comment. This does, in deed, seem to be the action of the C51 v6.14, MSVC, and BCB compilers - but MSVC and BCB are good enough to warn you about it! |
| Topic | Author | Date |
| Keil's 6.20c problem with comments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil\'s 6.20c problem with comments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil comments - correction | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil, MSVC, BCB - consensus | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil\'s 6.20c problem with comments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil\'s 6.20c comments - Craig | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil, MSVC, BCB - consensus | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil, MSVC, BCB - consensus | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil\\\'s 6.20c problem with comments | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil, MSVC, BCB - consensus | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil, MSVC, BCB - consensus | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
| RE: Keil, MSVC, BCB - Peter | 01/01/70 00:00 | |
First things first! | 01/01/70 00:00 |



