🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <4aq3l4$g39@newshost.lanl.gov>, tanmoy@qcd.lanl.gov (Tanmoy Bhattacharya) writes:
|>In article <4apkr7$8sp@rdsunx.crd.ge.com>, volpe@bart.crd.ge.com (Christopher
|>R. Volpe) writes: 
|>|> In article <4apgml$98i@newshost.lanl.gov>, tanmoy@qcd.lanl.gov (Tanmoy
|>Bhattacharya) writes: 
|>|> |>Is a compiler required to diagnose the mismatch of parameter types:
|>|> |>
|>|> |>void f(va_list*);
|>|> |>void g(int x,...) {
|>|> |> va_list y;
|>|> |> va_start (y,x);
|>|> |> f(y);
|>|> |> va_end(y);
|>|> |>}
|>|> |>
|>|> |>Or can the implementation allow it without warning?
|>|> |>
|>|> |>(Consider va_list == void* for example of why an implementation may want
|>to 
|>|> |>do it).
|>|> |>
|>|> 
|>|> Why would you want an implementation to allow you to pass a void* to a
|>|> function declared to take a void**?
|>
|>Because with a prototype in scope, void* automatically gets _converted_ to
|>the right type: an explicit cast is not required. 

I need a cup of coffee. Nevermind.

--

Chris Volpe				Phone: (518) 387-7766 (Dial Comm 8*833
GE Corporate R&D			Fax:   (518) 387-6560
PO Box 8, Schenectady, NY 12301		Email: volpecr@crd.ge.com