Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="Irrwahn Grausewitz, post: 2377608"]
[about the C99 lvalue definition]

[...]
| >'int' is MOST DEFINITELY an 'object type'.  It is most definitely 
| >NOT a 'function type' nor an 'incomplete type'.  You can't deny that.

There is no type in C that is neither an object type, nor a function
type, nor an incomplete type.  There's nothing like 'plain int' as 
opposed to 'object type int'; int is an object type by definition - 
always (6.2.5).

You're are mistaken.  The Standardese term 'object type' classifies 
types like int, double, etc. as being types that objects can have, 
but it doesn't require anything having this type being an object in 
the first place.

Some examples, where object types, but not necessarily objects, 
are involved: 
  - the value returned by a function call (6.5.2.2p1).
  - arguments passed to functions (6.5.2.2p4)
  - compound literals (6.5.2.5p1)
  - arithmetic operations (all arithmetic types are object types)
  - etc. pp. ad nauseam

THREE is not an expression: the compiler will never come to see it; 
so let's stick to 3 instead:

3 is not an object;
3 is of type int; 
int is an object type;
hence the expression 3 is a non-object having object type int.

Simple, isn't it?

<snip>

Regards
[/QUOTE]

Verification