Talk:Ackermann function

Is that definition in any actual programming language? It looks like C, but it doesn't have any visible types. --Ihope127 01:13, 20 Jun 2006 (UTC)

I think it's legal K&R C.

gcc -c -traditional ack.c

Yes, it's legal K&R C. It's also legal C89 (just about), but only because of the K&R compatibility. --ais523 09:14, 20 Jun 2006 (UTC)

Is it still legal without the types? --Ihope127 14:39, 20 Jun 2006 (UTC)

K&R C assumed 'int' whenever a type was not given, a behaviour inherited by C89 for compatibility reasons. The previous function (without the 'ints') under K&R C or C89 has the same behaviour as the edited version (with the 'ints') under C89 or C99 (the most recent version of C). --ais523 16:19, 20 Jun 2006 (UTC)