🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2022@munnari.oz.au> ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe) writes:
>  I believe that the draft standard requires void* and char* to have the
>  same representation.  I understand that this doesn't mean that char*
>  and char** will be the same, or that void* and char** will be the same,
>  but will void** and char** be the same?

This sounds like a good question for the `Interpretations' phase of X3J11's
existence.  (I'm redirecting this thread to comp.std.c.)  I think the answer
has to be Yes, since the reason for the requirement is to force compatibility
between ANSI libraries and pre-ANSI programs that explicitly declare functions
with `char *' rather than `void *'.  The same logic would seem to require
`void **' to have the same representation as `char **', at least if there are
any library functions that use this type, but I don't think I can prove it by
quoting the letter of the Standard.

Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl or karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint