Re: C's triadic operator.

Article View: comp.std.c

Article #6038

#6038

From: Doug Gwyn
Date: Mon, 15 May 1989 20:40

11 lines
969 bytes

In article <26212@watmath.waterloo.edu> rbutterworth@watmath.waterloo.edu (Ray Butterworth) writes:
>Does that seem obvious, reasonable, or useful to anyone out there?
>The Rationale gives no justification for this behaviour.

How about:  It is always possible to validly convert a pointer of any type
to a void*.  The other direction is not always valid.

>Not only that, as far as I know, the compiler is not even
>allowed to issue any warnings about how stupid this request is.

Conforming compilers may issue warnings about anything they wish.

Technical Details

Message-ID: <10266@smoke.BRL.MIL>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn

References: <26212@watmath.waterloo.edu>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uflorida!haven!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: C's triadic operator.
Message-ID: <10266@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 15 May 89 20:40:02 GMT
References: <26212@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Distribution: comp
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11

Reply to Parent Message