> C has nothing to do with C implementations.

But tail-call optimization does have something to do with implementations. >>33 was asking about implementations.

You think anyone cares what you think about something that nobody on this thread was talking about?

Grow up.

Nobody wants to be your friend, and nobody wants to talk to you because when someone asks a question about something you don't know anything about, you stamp your feet and cry and scream about something you do know something about.

> Your code is invalid. Line 3, you convert an integer to a pointer. Not only this is meaningless, but see 6.3.2.3 Pointers paragraph 5.

See >>33 for a reminder on just how irrelevant your statement is.

> Your code invokes undefined behavior.

You invoke undefined behavior. I know exactly what gcc will do because I looked at it's disassembly. In case you've forgotten already, this thread is about an implementation detail of C compilers, not about you.

> I said cognosente. Not conneisseur. Regardless, being a C cognosente means you both appreciate the semantics and you're highly specialized, ie an expert.

M-w, the oed, and wordnet all disagree with you.