Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ginosko!aplcen!haven!ncifcrf!nlm-mcs!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: Question about function pointers & prototypes
Message-ID: <10835@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 28 Aug 89 04:56:35 GMT
References: <1611@agora.UUCP> <19278@mimsy.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 7

In article <19278@mimsy.UUCP> chris@mimsy.UUCP (Chris Torek) writes:
>The proposed standard seems (meaning `you should check this yourself')
>to require that all function pointers `fit' in some other function pointer
>storage cell.

I don't recall any constraints that would imply this.  Pointers to
functions are far less "flexible" than object pointers.