Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!sun-barr!decwrl!hplabs!hpfcdc!rer
From: rer@hpfcdc.HP.COM (Rob Robason)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp
Subject: Re: HP-UX type declaration problem with signal(2)
Message-ID: <5570224@hpfcdc.HP.COM>
Date: 26 Jun 89 18:03:44 GMT
References: <218@bnrunix.UUCP>
Organization: HP Ft. Collins, Co.
Lines: 28

> upon looking at <signal.h> and comparing the 6.2 vs:  the 6.5, I find
> this difference...

> 6.2---
> extern  (*signal())();
> 6.5---
> extern  void (*signal())();
> 
> Should not 6.5 have a statement more like 6.2?????

This is a result of the support of ANSI C, which redefines the return
value of signal to be a pointer to void, which is an ANSICism for a
"generic" pointer.

From the standard:

A pointer to void shall have the same representation and alignment
requirements as a pointer to a character type.

From the ANSI C Rationale:

A "pointer to void," void *, is a generic pointer, capable of pointing
to any (data) object without trunctation.

> Randall
> ----------

Rob Robason