Article View: comp.std.c
Article #5003Re: Initializing a variable in terms of itself
From: Jon Becker
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 14:45
Date: Tue, 09 Apr 1996 14:45
19 lines
1268 bytes
1268 bytes
In article <4kciur$l9l@usenet.pa.dec.com>, Norman Diamond <diamond@tbj.dec.com> wrote: > >There is no difference between your two versions. Conversions either way >between a pointer to object type (including a pointer to incomplete type) >and a pointer to void are allowed implicitly and are identical to conversions >obtained from explicit casts. > I see nothing in the standard which suggests that a pointer to incomplete type is included in the category of pointers to object type. My impression is that the standard describes these two pointer types as entirely distinct. (Note that this is a different topic than that to which your answer refers. I completely agree with your point. I merely take issue with the implication of your wording.) -Jon
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<4kdt6o$j43@nntp.Stanford.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!Xenon.Stanford.EDU!beckerReferences:
<4jpj9l$ik9@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <KANZE.96Apr2171323@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <4k65h6$dfe@nntp.crl.com> <4kciur$l9l@usenet.pa.dec.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!Xenon.Stanford.EDU!becker From: becker@Xenon.Stanford.EDU (Jon Becker) Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Initializing a variable in terms of itself Date: 9 Apr 1996 14:45:44 GMT Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University. Message-ID: <4kdt6o$j43@nntp.Stanford.EDU> References: <4jpj9l$ik9@cnn.Princeton.EDU> <KANZE.96Apr2171323@slsvgqt.lts.sel.alcatel.de> <4k65h6$dfe@nntp.crl.com> <4kciur$l9l@usenet.pa.dec.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: xenon.stanford.edu