🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4jtt2c$3eq@solutions.solon.com>
           news@spar.ca "USENET News System" writes:

>/* Under the Microsoft Visual C++ 2.0 and 4.0 the following 
>    was observed. */
>
>typedef struct  { int a; int b; } *TA;
>typedef struct  { int a; int b; }  *TB;

Under ANSI C TA and TB have two distinct, incompatible types, they cannot
be directly assigned.

>void
>f( TA x, TB y )
>{
>  f ( y, x);            /* This compiles fine */

This is a constraint violation and a diagnostic is required. I tried this
with gcc and and old Microsoft version 6 compiler supplied with SCO Unix
and both generate the required diagnostic. Are you sure you're compiling in a
full ANSI C conformant mode?

>}
>
>typedef struct tagA { int a; int b; } *UA;
>typedef struct tagB { float ttt; } *UB;
>
>void
>g( UA x, UB y )
>{
>  g ( y, x);            /* This does not */
>  /* error C2664: 'g' : 
>  cannot convert parameter 1 from 'struct tagB*' to 'struct tagA*' */
>}
>
>/* My question is this: Why does the function f compile without errors?
>    I've tried this code in gcc and I get an error in both functions.
>    Who is right here? I suspect gcc is correct, but is Microsoft's 
>    implemention allowable in the standard also? */

No, it isn't, at least not with the compiler options you used.

-- 
-----------------------------------------
Lawrence Kirby | fred@genesis.demon.co.uk
Wilts, England | 70734.126@compuserve.com
-----------------------------------------