help2002

It's UWAweek 38 (2nd semester, week 8)

help2002

This forum is provided to promote discussion amongst students enrolled in CITS2002 Systems Programming.
Please consider offering answers and suggestions to help other students! And if you fix a problem by following a suggestion here, it would be great if other interested students could see a short "Great, fixed it!" followup message.

Displaying the 2 articles in this topic

Showing 2 of 487 articles.
Currently 22 other people reading this forum.

UWA week 35 (2nd semester, week 6) ↓

1st project Question about parameters/arguments for project (both)

4:25pm Wed 28th Aug, ANONYMOUS

In one of the other help questions it was stated that "Christopher McDonald" <ch*i*.*c*o*a*d@u*a*e*u*a*> wrote:

> > 4. What is meant by point 8 on the “Our ml language” section of the project page? Do arg0, arg1, etc. refer to arguments passed to the main() function of the c file/code we create by translating a given ml file? > > When the compiled C program is executed, its runtime command-line arguments are available in ml's arg0, arg1, ... > > Hope this helps,

HI am a little confused as to why it'll be arg0, arg1, ... as in the project "The goal of this project is to implement a C11 program, named runml, which accepts a single command-line argument providing the pathname of a text file containing a program written in ml." so will there be a case where the argument passed will be more than just ./runml (filename) ? Thanks for the clarification

1st project Question about parameters/arguments for project (both)

5:22pm Wed 28th Aug, Christopher M.

ANONYMOUS wrote:

> HI am a little confused as to why it'll be arg0, arg1, ... as in the project "The goal of this project is to implement a C11 program, named runml, which accepts a single command-line argument providing the pathname of a text file containing a program written in ml." so will there be a case where the argument passed will be more than just ./runml (filename) ? Thanks for the clarification

Thanks for highlighting this omission. It's now correctly stated on our Clarifications' page [CITS2002]⬈