Andrey Tushev has been working at the Volgograd Youth Theater since 2010. During this time, he proved himself as a versatile actor, a professional in his field. Deep penetration into created image, sincerity and accuracy of the presentation of the material made him a favorite of the audience and brought recognition from his comrades in the shop.
Andrey Tushev's creative baggage includes a wide range of images created on the stage of the Youth Theatre. Such as Gary in the play "Gagarin Way", Warrior in the play "About the King of the Earth and Heaven", Coleman Connor in the play "The Dreary West", Seva Polonsky in the play "My Feast of Love", Nazaryev in the play "Life in Questions and Exclamations" , Shustek in the play “Before the cock crows”, roles in the productions of “Songs about the main thing”, “Notes of a Madman”, “Terrorism”, “Scream behind the scenes”.
The talent of Andrey Tushev was especially pronounced in the productions of the Volgograd Youth Theater recent years. His Chekhov characters in the play “Life in Questions and Exclamations” (in this production the artist plays several roles at once) are touching, a little funny and so familiar to us with their human weaknesses. You sincerely sympathize with them, empathize with the absurdities that they create for themselves. These are the same Chekhov " funny people”, for the images of which we love the work of Anton Pavlovich so much.
Another role, the veterinarian Shustek in the play "Before the rooster crows", turned out to be a landmark for the actor. In a magnificent ensemble of eleven characters, Pan Shustek Tusheva did not get lost, he remained a juicy brushstroke in a bright palette. The actor does not spare colors in the negative manifestations of his character. His Shustek is selfish, nervous, angry, hot-tempered, often unfair. But at the same time, he remains a living person with his aspirations, breakdowns and remorse.
Musicality and eccentric facets of his talent Tushev shows in the fairy tale "Puss in Boots", where in the images of Hans and Gustav he dances and sings beautifully, drawing funny characters that children like so much. Undoubted successes were the roles of the Middle in the absurdist play by Mrozhek "On the High Seas" and the freight forwarder Ugarov in the play based on Vampilov's comedy "Provincial Anecdotes". So different both in style and in character, the characters succeeded the actor with the same accuracy. The audience also remembered his Mikola from Shukshin's Freaks, a rude, narrow-minded, but sincere and sincere guy. Of particular note is the role of Tomsky in The Queen of Spades. In a stylish, infernal performance staged by Adgur Kove, Tushev leads the line of a rake, a bully and a life-burner. In the production of "Cabaret Illusion" Andrey showed outstanding vocal and plastic abilities.
Together with Volgograd youth theater and St. Petersburg director Yevgeny Zimin Andrey Tushev opens the famous Shakespearean comedy Twelfth Night. There is no doubt that new role, Sir Andrew Aguecheek, he will succeed with brilliance!
Let there be users of the information system. Authorized users are allowed to build their models in this IS. Unauthorized people can only watch how others build these models, but they cannot do it themselves.Question: how many roles in IS?
Suppose there are two heaps of sand piled side by side.
Question:
Is it one pile, or are there still two piles, but now piled side by side?
Let there be a position of director of school No. 123. Sidorov takes this position after Ivanov.
Question:
Are these two different directors, or one director?
Today Ivanov plays the role of Princess Mary.
Question:
tomorrow, when he plays a role with the same name, will it be the same role or a different one?
Question:
Sidorov, who today plays a role with the same name, plays the same role, or a different one?
There is a clock mechanism that acts as a clock drive in the clock on the city tower. Suppose it broke and was replaced with another clock mechanism.
Question:
is the clock drive different now, or is it the same clock drive, but with a different clockwork?
All these questions (and similar ones) can be answered in the same way - everyone decides for himself, as it suits him, based on the context. This usually does not bother anyone, because there is no need to build models. As an analyst, I have to be constantly on the alert. It is necessary to understand how the client sees the subject area in order to correctly build a model. Today I want to show you the sequence of reasoning that I do.
Solution Explanation
Let there be a director of school No. 123 Sidorov. Question: is this the same role as the director of school No. 123 Ivanov? First you need to understand for whom it is being built Information system?Let her build to collect statistical reporting for the salary of school directors. For this reporting, all directors are faceless. There is no difference between Ivanov and Sidorov holding a position, but it is important to distinguish between directors different schools. It is clear that from this point of view, the role of the school principal is one.
Now let's assume that the IS is built to analyze the performance of various school directors. In such an IS, it will be important to distinguish between Ivanov as a director and Sidorov as a director. From this point of view, the roles of directors will be different.
In order to understand how to move from the first view to the second, you need to understand what a role is. I wrote about this in detail in the article Modeling accounting objects. Let me remind you briefly. A role is a certain 4-dimensional volume of space-time occupied in different time different people, or rather their temporal parts. This means that a role can be represented as a construct consisting of temporal parts of people, each of which is characterized by a start date and end date of its participation. The role itself is not a set of these temporal parts, but a gluing together of all these parts.
The concept of gluing must be explained in detail. As well as the concept of separation. If we take four legs and a tabletop, then by connecting them together, we get a table. Looking at the place that the table occupies, we can switch our attention, at different times seeing either 4 legs and a table top, or the whole table. Gluing is such a process of perception, thanks to which we can imagine a lot as a whole. Separation is such a process of perception, thanks to which we can represent the whole as a lot. Our consciousness is capable of both dividing and sticking together. But we are not always aware of these processes.
Imagine that you have several piles of sand. You put them together and you get one pile. The temporal parts are glued together in exactly the same way. You take them and glue them. Out of many small temporal parts, you get one temporal part bigger size. Thus, to obtain the role of the director of school No. 123, it is necessary to glue together the temporal parts: the role of the director of school No. 123, played by Ivanov, with the role of the director of school No. 123, played by Sidorov.
If you can combine heaps of sand, then you can divide one heap into parts. By analogy, the role can be divided into parts. Let there be the role of the director of the school, performed by Sidorov. Let's imagine it as a set of roles, each of which is the daily performance of the role of director by Sidorov from 8-00 when he comes to work, until 17-00 when he leaves. We can say that the role of the headmaster, played by Sidorov, is a gluing together of all the daily roles of Sidorov.
Let there be many daily roles performed by Sidorov. As we can see, these roles can be glued together and get one big role. You can stack them up and see what they have in common - create a typical daily role. Can do statistical analysis these daily roles. At the same time, it is important to understand what objects we are working with, and what attributes are used in this case. If there is a question about the duration of Sidorov's work as a director, then we are talking about gluing daily roles into one big role, and this duration is a property of this role. If the question is about when Sidorov USUALLY comes to work, then we are talking about Sidorov's typical daily role, and this time is a property of the typical daily role. If the question is what time Sidorov comes to work on AVERAGE, then we are talking about a set of daily roles and this time is a property of a set of daily roles. Therefore, if we want to correctly transfer these properties to the IS, we need to create in the IS all the objects I have listed: daily roles, a glued large role, a typical role, a set of roles. At the same time, it must be remembered that a set in an IS is a separate object with its own attributes, and not just a bunch of roles.
It is possible to glue the roles of all directors of all schools, and at the same time get such a huge role - the director of the school, which will be performed by different people at the same time in different places. Therefore, a role is not necessarily performed by one person at one time. A role can be performed by different people at the same time in different places. At the same time, this huge role should not be confused with the typical role of a school principal! This kind of confusion is quite common. In addition, a typical role is often given as a role.
I hope the answer is clear now: as much as you want. You can call the participation of the user in each session a role. You can glue all sessions related to one account, and define a role for this fusion, you can glue all sessions of authorized users and define a role for this fusion. You can glue all sessions and define a role for this gluing - this will be a merging of authorized and unauthorized users. And you can glue work sessions in this program with work sessions in other programs. Etc. and whatever. The question of expediency. It all depends on the goals of our accounting: the constructed model must satisfy the goals of our work.
The Nature of Roles and Physical Objects
After our conversation, the impression remains that the role is something ephemeral - gluing, cutting. But in fact the role is of the same nature as any other physical object. The fact that we get a role by cutting space-time, or gluing it together, does not make the role something different from any other physical object. Imagine a world where people know about the transmigration of souls from one body to another. At the same time, they not only know this, they have passports for souls, and not for bodies. They often say - I had a great rest in the role of Ivanov, or I, in the role of Sidorov, did not work well on my karma. And what you see as an object, they perceive as a role.Physical objects can also be glued and cut to create new objects. For example, a plank plus a plank makes a bench. Or the table can be cut into a tabletop and legs. or matter in solar system can be divided into a gas-dust cloud left after a supernova explosion and into planetary system, which arose later from this cloud.
As a result, you will be able to understand that everything around us is nothing more than the result of our interpretation of the real and incomprehensible world. And the fact that our consciousness distinguishes between the physical world as a reality and the world of roles as imagined by us is nothing more than egocentrism, similar to the anthropocentrism of the Ptolemaic system.
I made an explanation of how objects appear in our minds in the article
Theme 2
THEORETICAL FOUNDATIONS OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNMENT
2.1 Formation of theories local government
2.2 Modern theories of LSG
Basic concepts
free community theory, social theory, state theory, legal theory, dualism theory of municipal government, social service theories, decentralization, deconcentration, concept sustainable development, local community development concept.
2.1 Formation of theories of local government
The French scientist J.-G.Ture in 1790 in the National Assembly of France for the first time formulated and substantiated the ideas of organizing community management. He pointed out the main problem of the doctrine of local self-government - the definition of the content of concepts: 1) "own community affairs", inherent in nature municipal government and 2) “state affairs”, which are transferred by the state to local self-government bodies.
See: Kudinov O.A. municipal law Russian Federation: lecture course. - M.: Os-89, 2005. P.8.
“Communal institutions play the same role in establishing independence as primary schools for science; they open the way to freedom for the people and teach them to use this freedom, to enjoy its peaceful character. Without communal institutions, a nation can form a free government, but it will never acquire the true spirit of freedom. Transient passions, momentary interests, random circumstances can only create the appearance of independence, but despotism, driven into the social organism, will sooner or later reappear on the surface.
Tocqueville A. Democracy in America. - M., 1992. P.83.
The theory of a free (natural) community
originated in mid-nineteenth century in Belgium and France within the framework of the school of natural law and was developed in the works of German and then Russian scientists. Its authors (A. Tocqueville, N. Gerber, G. Ahrens, R. Gneist and others) believed that the right of the community to manage its own affairs is as natural and inalienable as human rights and the state must respect the freedom of community management. The community has the right to autonomy and independence from central government by its very nature, the state does not create a community, but only recognizes it.
Along with the executive, legislative and judicial powers, it was stated that it was necessary to recognize the fourth power - local (municipal, communal, communal).
Local self-government bodies are the bodies of the community, not the state, and they are elected by the members of the community. Any illegal state interference in the affairs of the community was considered a violation of its rights.
Economic theory of self-government
Its representatives (R. Mol, A. Vasilchikov) focused not only on the recognition of a self-governing community as an independent subject of law, but also on maintenance of communal activities. Local self-government was considered alien to politics, its main area is economic activity aimed at satisfying basic needs society for the maintenance of its home and everything that surrounds it.
However, economic theory, which sought to reduce all its activities to economic issues, very soon lost credibility in science. Practice testified that economic activity is not the main feature of local self-government. Almost everywhere, self-government bodies were engaged in many social issues (protection of public order, care for the poor, management of fire and sanitary measures, etc.).
Municipal management: Proc. allowance. / A.G. Gladyshev, V.N. Ivanov, E.S. Savchenko et al. M., 2002. P. 89.
Social theory or social economic theory
The main provisions were formulated by the German scientist R. Gneist in 1808 during one of the first reforms of local self-government in Prussia. The prerequisite for the reform was the deterioration of the economic condition of the country, largely due to the inefficient system of urban management.
Based on this theory, the state recognized the right to self-government as the natural right of any community and assumed obligations not to suppress the activities of public organizations.
The most prominent representatives of this theory were the German scientists R. Moll, A. Scheffle, O. Girke, G. Preuss.
R. Mol believed that the community - a cell of self-government - is one of the natural spheres of human activity. The state cannot encroach on its independence, it is called upon to assist the community in the implementation of its goals and interests. By independence, he understood the right of the community to freely determine the scope and content of the goals set in relation to the needs, means and will of an individual association and to achieve their achievement in a certain space of common life.
[1] Cited. Quoted from: Chernyak E.V. Theories of local self-government in German and Russian science XIX - early XX centuries. - Kazan, 2010. P.23.
In sexually reproducing organisms, the genes of the parents are mixed in the genome of the offspring. This allows natural selection work not with whole genomes, but with individual genes, supporting successful variants and rejecting unsuccessful ones. In bacteria, it was believed that selection works mainly at the level of whole genomes, which is much less efficient. Theoretically, horizontal gene exchange could partially replace sexual reproduction in bacteria. However, it was not clear to what extent this is characteristic of natural populations of microbes. After studying two closely related populations of marine bacteria that have recently begun to adapt to different niches, American biologists have come to the conclusion that the adaptive evolution of bacteria occurs through the spread of individual genes, not entire genomes, that is, in the same way as in sexually reproducing organisms. It follows from this that in the course of adaptation to new conditions, horizontal genetic exchange successfully replaces sexual reproduction in bacteria.
The essence of the sexual process, characteristic of most higher organisms (eukaryotes), is the mixing (recombination) of genes (more precisely, DNA sections) of different individuals. The genes that make up the genome, due to regular recombination, cease to be tightly connected with each other. The mixing of genetic material allows natural selection to work at the level of individual genes rather than entire genomes. This radically increases the efficiency of selection and promotes rapid adaptive (adaptive) evolution. For example, if an individual has a beneficial mutation in one gene and a harmful mutation in another, then due to the sexual process, the first of these mutations gets a chance to spread in the gene pool regardless of the second, and the second, most likely, will be successfully rejected by selection, regardless of the first (for more details, see the note Experiments on worms proved that males are a useful thing, "Elements", 10/23/2009).
In asexual organisms that practice clonal reproduction (for example, by budding or fission in two), selection has to work with entire genomes. At the same time, the fates of all beneficial and harmful mutations that occur in the genome are inextricably linked with each other. This imposes serious restrictions on the adaptive capabilities of organisms.
Bacteria do not have a true sexual process, like eukaryotes, that is, regular mixing of all parts of the genome. However, horizontal gene transfer (HGO; see Horizontal gene transfer) is common among them, during which some microbes borrow DNA fragments from others. Borrowed genes can either be added to those already available in the recipient bacterium, or (due to the mechanism of homologous recombination, Homologous recombination) the “own” DNA fragment is replaced by a similar “foreign” fragment.
It is known that GGO plays a huge role in the evolution of prokaryotes. However, the available data point mainly to events that can be roughly classified as "macroevolutionary": these are relatively rare cases of successful transfers between unrelated groups of microbes (see Horizontal gene transfer and evolution). It is much easier to identify a gene as borrowed if it comes from an unrelated organism. Such a gene will be very different from its counterparts in the closest relatives of this bacterium. Cases of horizontal transfer between closely related strains of microbes are more difficult to detect. However, it is precisely such a “closely related” GGO, if it is sufficiently widespread in nature, that could partly replace the real sexual process for microbes and increase the efficiency of their adaptive evolution.
It is still unclear whether GGO between closely related microbes plays a significant role in microevolutionary changes, that is, in the routine, everyday adaptation of bacteria to changing environmental conditions. The prevailing point of view is that selection in bacteria is still mainly clonal, acting at the level of entire genomes. It is this situation that is reproduced, for example, in Richard Lensky's long-term evolutionary experiment, where bacteria lacking the genes necessary for GGO evolve in test tubes (see: Selection for "evolutionary prospects" revealed in a long-term evolutionary experiment, "Elements", 03/25/2011) .
Biologists from Massachusetts Institute of Technology(MIT) attempted to clarify the issue of the microevolutionary role of GGO using the example of two populations of marine planktonic bacteria Vibrio cyclitrophicus. Previously, the authors showed that these two populations, denoted by the letters L and S, have recently separated and are currently in the process of adapting to different ecological niches. This can be seen from their confinement, respectively, to large (L) and small (S) particles filtered from sea water, and according to the results of genetic analysis (see: Hunt et al., 2008. , PDF, 529 Kb). Apparently, these two populations are adapting to life on different representatives zoo- or phytoplankton.
The authors decided to find out which of the two processes prevails on early stages ecological differentiation - the selection of individual genes with successful mutations that are propagated by GGO, or clonal selection that maintains or rejects entire genomes. These two situations can be distinguished by comparing the intra- and interpopulation genetic polymorphism (variability) of the studied populations.
If selection at the gene level predominates, two populations must clearly differ from each other in a small number of genes - those on which the ecological properties of populations depend. At the same time, different parts of the genome should have a reduced level of intrapopulation polymorphism in at least one of the two populations. After all, selection acted on each such site, which supported some one variant of this site, displacing its other variants from the gene pool. On the contrary, those regions of the genome that are similar in two populations should be more polymorphic, and the sets of genetic variants (alleles) may be the same in two populations (because the selection associated with adaptation to a new niche did not act on them, and they could retain the original polymorphism accumulated by the ancestral population).
If clonal selection prevailed in the process of population divergence, then both the level of polymorphism and genetic differences between populations should be more evenly distributed over the genome.
The authors sequenced the complete genomes of thirteen bacteria from population L and seven individuals from population S. Analysis of the read genomes confirmed the first version: in the recent evolution of two bacterial populations, selection at the level of individual genes clearly prevailed, which would have been impossible without intensive GGO between closely related microbes.
725 dimorphic nucleotide positions were found, in which all microbes from population L always have one nucleotide, and all microbes from population S have another. The authors named these 725 positions "ecoSNPs" because they are most likely responsible for adaptation to differing living conditions. This can also be seen from the functions of the genes to which they are confined. Ecosnips are not randomly scattered throughout the genome, but are grouped into 11 relatively compact clusters. Within each of these clusters, at least one of the two populations exhibits a reduced level of genetic polymorphism, suggesting a recent act of positive selection.
All other snips (polymorphic nucleotide positions), including 28,744 pieces, are evenly distributed throughout the genome and demonstrate a similar pattern of polymorphism in both populations. For example, at some position, the C nucleotide can be found in six, and the G nucleotide in seven bacteria from the L population, while in the S population, the C nucleotide is found in three bacteria, and G in four.
The discovered pattern of distribution of nucleotide differences is fully consistent with the assumption that, in the course of adaptation to different conditions, selection in combination with GGO (and homologous recombination) contributed to the spread of individual DNA regions with successful mutations, rather than entire genomes, while the original polymorphism was preserved in other regions of the genome. present in the ancestral population.
As for homologous recombination, that is, the replacement of “one’s own” version of a gene with a “foreign” (borrowed) one, this process is typical for the so-called central, or basic (core) part of the genome, which is very similar in all 20 studied bacteria. In the other, “plastic” (flexible) part of the genome, in which the sets of genes and their sequences can vary greatly, apparently, insertions of foreign genes in addition to the existing ones (sometimes compensated by the loss of some other DNA segments) predominated.
Another confirmation of intense GGO between closely related microbes is the fact that phylogenetic (evolutionary) trees built for 20 studied bacteria turn out to be different depending on which genome fragments are used to build them. By analyzing these trees, as well as using other methods of comparative genomics, the authors found evidence of numerous recent transfers of genetic material within each of the two populations. In particular, it was possible to show the rapid spread of the whole chromosome in the S population. Vibrio cyclitrophicus The genome consists of two chromosomes, denoted by the numbers I and II. One of the variants of chromosome II has recently spread under the influence of selection in the S population (it is found in 5 out of 7 bacteria). Chromosome II spread independently of chromosome I, which means that bacteria can easily exchange entire chromosomes, not just their fragments.
Another important conclusion is that the genetic exchange between populations in Lately occurs rarely compared to exchange within populations. In the past, when populations had not yet completely dispersed into ecological niches, interpopulation exchange occurred more frequently.
The results obtained indicate the need to revise some of the established ideas about the evolution of prokaryotes.
First, the study showed that genetic level microevolutionary processes in "asexual" prokaryotes and sexually reproducing eukaryotes do not differ that much. In both cases, the selection takes place mainly at the level separate fragments DNA, not entire genomes.
Secondly, it became clear that the genetic exchange between closely related microbes (representatives of the same population) is very active, providing intensive recombination and, in fact, performing the same function as the sexual process in higher organisms. Wherein important role homologous recombination is playing, due to which the borrowed genes are not so much added to the existing ones, but replace their "old versions" that are present in the recipient's genome. In addition, the possibility of the exchange of whole chromosomes, and not just small fragments of DNA, has been shown.
Thirdly, the increased frequency of intrapopulation HGO compared to interpopulation suggests that bacteria that adapt to different ecological niches form partial reproductive isolation, just like in higher organisms in the process of sympatric speciation. This isolation seems to be based not only on the fact that microbes with different adaptations live in different places and therefore rarely occur, but also on the fact that as nucleotide differences accumulate, the probability of homologous recombination decreases. Apparently, prokaryotes still cannot be considered "a single hyperpolymorphic species" (as some theorists have suggested, based on the assumption that microbes exchange genes with anyone, regardless of the degree of relationship). In prokaryotes, as well as in higher organisms, population gene pools partially isolated from each other can exist. As for the numerous cases of HGO known to us between unrelated groups of microbes, they may represent only the tip of the iceberg - easily detectable and sometimes having very important evolutionary consequences, but still relatively rare. by-effect the ability of microbes to regularly exchange genes with their closest relatives.
Functions in C play the same role as subroutines and functions in Fortran or procedures and functions in Pascal. The function provides convenient way Separately issue some calculation and use it further, without caring about how it is implemented. After the functions are written, you can forget How they are done, it is enough to know What they know how to do. The mechanism for using a function in C is convenient, easy, and efficient. Often you will see short functions that are called only once: they are formatted as a function with the sole purpose of making the program clearer.
So far we've been using ready-made functions like main, getchar and putchar, now it's time for us to write some functions ourselves. There is no exponentiation operator in C like ** in Fortran. Therefore, we illustrate the mechanism for defining a function using the example of the function power(m, n), which raises the integer m to a positive integer power of n. So power(2, 5) is 32. In fact, for practical application this function is of little use, since it operates only on small integer powers, but it may well serve as an illustration. (There is a function in the standard library pow(x, y), which calculates x to the power of y.)
So we have a power function and a main function using its services, so the whole program looks like this:
#include ‹stdio.h›
int power(int m, int n);
/* power function test */
for (i = 0; i ‹ 10; ++i)
/* raise base to nth degree, n ›= 0 */
int power(int base, int n)
for (i = 1; i ‹= n; ++i)
The definition of any function has the following form:
result-type function-name (parameter list, if any)
ads
instructions
Function definitions can be placed in any order in one or more source files, but any function must be located entirely in one. If the program's source code is spread over several files, you'll have to say a little more to compile and download it than if you were using a single file; but that already applies to operating system and not to the language. For now, we're assuming both functions are in the same file, so the knowledge you've already gained about running C programs will suffice.
In the next line from the main function, power is accessed twice.
printf("%d %d %d\n", i, power(2,i), power(-3,i));
Each time power is called, two arguments are passed, and each time main program main receives an integer as a response, which is then converted to the proper format and printed. Inside the expression, power(2, i) is an integer value just like 2 or i. (Not all functions return integer values; more on that in Chapter 4.)
In the first line of the power definition:
int power(int base, int n);
parameter types, function name, and result type are specified. Parameter names are local inside power, which means that they are hidden from every other function, so other subroutines are free to use the same names for their own purposes. The last statement is also true for the variables i and p: i in power and i in main have nothing in common.
Further parameter we will name the variable from the list of parameters enclosed in parentheses and given in the function definition, and argument- the value used when calling the function. Sometimes in the same sense we will use the terms formal argument And actual argument .
The value computed by the power function is returned to main using the statement return. Behind the word return any expression can follow:
return expression ;
The function does not necessarily return any value. Instruction return without an expression, it only transfers control to the program that called it, without passing any result value to it. The same thing happens if, in the course of calculations, we reach the end of the function, indicated in the text by the last closing curly brace. It is possible that the calling function ignores the result returned to it.
You probably paid attention to the instructions return at the end main. Since main is a function, like any other, it can return the resulting value to the one who called it - in fact, to the environment from which the program was launched. Normally, a null value is returned, which indicates that the execution completed normally. A non-zero value signals an unusual or erroneous termination. So far, for the sake of simplicity, we've omitted return from main, but from now on, we'll use return as a reminder that programs should report their exit status to the operating system.
Announcement
int power(int m, int n);
standing directly in front main, tells that the power function expects two arguments of type int and returns a result like int. This ad is called function prototype, must be consistent with the definition and all calls power. If a function definition or call does not match its prototype, it is an error.
Parameter names do not require negotiation. In fact, in the prototype, they can be arbitrary or absent altogether, i.e., the prototype could be written like this:
int power(int, int);
However, well-chosen names explain the program, and we will often use this.
Historical reference. Most big differences ANSI-C from earlier versions of the language is just about how functions are declared and defined. In the first version of C, the power function had to be specified in following form:
/* power: raise base to the nth power, n ›= 0 */
/* (old-style C version) */
for (i = 1; i ‹= n; ++i)
Here, the parameter names are listed in parentheses, and their types are given before the first opening curly brace. If there is no indication of the type of the parameter, it is considered to be of type int. (The body of the function has not changed.)
The description of power at the beginning of the program according to the first version of C would have looked like this:
It was not possible to specify a list of parameters, and therefore the compiler was not able to check the correctness of calls to power. Since, in the absence of a declaration of power, it was assumed that the function returns a value of type int, in this case the declaration could be omitted entirely.
The new syntax for function prototypes makes it easier for the compiler to catch errors in the number of arguments and their types. The old function declaration and definition syntax is still allowed by the ANSI standard, at least for transition period, but if your compiler supports the new syntax, we strongly recommend that you only use it.
Exercise 1.15. Rewrite the temperature conversion program, separating the conversion itself into a separate function.
