From owner-freebsd-questions Thu Jan 13 7:30: 0 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [199.172.62.20]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93CE914DBD for ; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 07:29:57 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from lowell@world.std.com) Received: from world.std.com (lowell@world-f.std.com [199.172.62.5]) by europe.std.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA05438; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 10:29:52 -0500 (EST) Received: (from lowell@localhost) by world.std.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA06100; Thu, 13 Jan 2000 10:29:52 -0500 (EST) To: "Mikhail Evstiounin" , freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Giving a sighandler more information References: <00eb01bf5dc6$5adffe00$fc353018@evstiouninadelphia.net.pit.adelphia.net> From: Lowell Gilbert Date: 13 Jan 2000 10:29:51 -0500 In-Reply-To: "Mikhail Evstiounin"'s message of Thu, 13 Jan 2000 08:01:49 -0500 Message-ID: Lines: 21 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/Emacs 20.2 Sender: owner-freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG "Mikhail Evstiounin" writes: > > > Sorry, guys, but it requirenments of ANSI that > sizeof(void*)==sizeof(int). > > > >No! A program which assumes that an int is large enough to > >store a pointer is BROKEN. See this simple test program: > > > Oliver, IT'S A REQUIRIMENTS OF THE STANDARD!!! - NOT MY WISH!!! Can you quote where in the standard it says this? I believe you are incorrect. I don't have a copy of the actual standard document, but Kernighan and Ritchie say nothing more than "A pointer may be converted to an integral type large enough to hold it; the required size is implementation-dependent." This directly contradicts your claim. I *do* have an early draft (from about a year ago) of the C9x standard document, and it says the same thing, albeit in a lot more words. - Lowell To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message