Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2005 18:36:27 +0200 From: Erik Trulsson <ertr1013@student.uu.se> To: Joseph Koshy <joseph.koshy@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-standards@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Standard type for code pointers? Message-ID: <20050420163627.GA1316@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> In-Reply-To: <84dead720504200910441b9108@mail.gmail.com> References: <84dead720504200541539f4c15@mail.gmail.com> <03f22a3c76ac440b97e2179761dfd6fa@xcllnt.net> <20050420155407.GA844@falcon.midgard.homeip.net> <84dead720504200910441b9108@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Apr 20, 2005 at 04:10:30PM +0000, Joseph Koshy wrote: > > Except that intptr_t need only be large enough to hold an > > object pointer. This is not necessarily enough to hold a > > function pointer. > > Right. > > > The only standard types that are guaranteed to be able to hold > > a function pointer are other function pointers. > > Right, but there doesn't seem to be a C99 name for function > pointer types. No, but since any function pointer type is large enough to hold any function pointer you can just pick one. (But when you actually call a function pointer, it must be a pointer of the correct type.) > > Is 'register_t' guaranteed to be wide enough? No idea. It is not part of the C standard anyway. -- <Insert your favourite quote here.> Erik Trulsson ertr1013@student.uu.se
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050420163627.GA1316>