a "derived-declarator-type-list" isn't

[Henry Spencer]

In several of the subsections of 3.5.4, the result of a particular form
of declarator is defined in terms of the result of a simpler form, which
is said to supply a type "derived-declarator-type-list T".

There is just one problem with this.  Nothing ever defines what a d-d-t-l
is.  Despite the name, it is not a list of derived declarator types,
and indeed it is not a list of types at all.  The ill-defined horror of
"top type" lives on, sigh...

An experienced C programmer, of course, "knows" what the descriptions mean.
But he won't figure it out from the standard.
-- 
Imagine life with OS/360 the standard  | Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
operating system.  Now think about X.  |  henry at zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry