Email List: Xaustin-group-lX
[All Lists]

RE: [1003.1(2008)/Issue 7 0000074]: Pointer Types Problem

To: "Schwarz, Konrad" <konrad.schwarz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [1003.1(2008)/Issue 7 0000074]: Pointer Types Problem
From: wollman+austin-group@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 3 Jul 2009 15:33:04 -0400
Cc: <austin-group-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <e26e5335cda9d0dfe49395e6115066fe@austingroupbugs.net><1730938080F74546ACC51CB65BA00565@ott.qnx.com><20090702094404.GA28393@squonk.masqnet><4A4CC239.2040603@qnx.com><5030E566C603DA449D6B4C060CE529B73A8F37@MCHP7RDA.ww002.siemens.net><4A4D2366.9090904@qnx.com><5030E566C603DA449D6B4C060CE529B73A8FF1@MCHP7RDA.ww002.siemens.net>
<<On Fri, 3 Jul 2009 09:55:25 +0200, "Schwarz, Konrad" 
<konrad.schwarz@siemens.com> said:

> In the C standard, paragraph 1 states that the conversions void * to
> other object/incomplete type are allowed, paragraph 7 states what
> happens

[...more excellent standards-lawyering deleted...]

After all this, wouldn't it simply be easier to define a new dlfunc()
interface?  There is prior art.

-GAWollman

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>