Date: 13 Jan 2000 10:29:51 -0500 From: Lowell Gilbert <lowell@world.std.com> To: "Mikhail Evstiounin" <evstiounin@adelphia.net>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Giving a sighandler more information Message-ID: <rd6zouaat1s.fsf@world.std.com> In-Reply-To: "Mikhail Evstiounin"'s message of Thu, 13 Jan 2000 08:01:49 -0500 References: <00eb01bf5dc6$5adffe00$fc353018@evstiouninadelphia.net.pit.adelphia.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
"Mikhail Evstiounin" <evstiounin@adelphia.net> 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
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?rd6zouaat1s.fsf>