Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!unido!tub!net
From: net@tub.UUCP (Oliver Laumann)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Davidsen's device
Message-ID: <888@tub.UUCP>
Date: 4 Aug 89 12:59:08 GMT
References: <1430@crdgw1.crd.ge.com>
Reply-To: net@tub.UUCP (Oliver Laumann)
Organization: Technical University of Berlin, Germany
Lines: 26

In article <1430@crdgw1.crd.ge.com> davidsen@crdos1.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
>   I recently discovered the following technique. While I can't swear
> that it's new and unique to me, I can claim independent discovery. I
> make no claims that it is suited to any problem you have, will have, or
> would admit to having.
> 
> 	(*(asect < 1.0 ? hacs2 : hacs1)(asect);

This is quite a common idiom, I have used it lots of times (without the
syntax error in your example, of course).

You can even omit the * since it's superfluous.

Or is it?  Our K&R (the old edition) doesn't seem to say anything about
this, but "gnucc -pedantic -ansi" doesn't complain about the following
program (a good heuristic for checking whether it's valid C):

int g() { return 5; }

int foo() {
    int (*f)() = g;
    return f();
}

--
Oliver Laumann              net@TUB.BITNET              net@tub.UUCP