Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!usc!wuarchive!texbell!sugar!ficc!peter From: peter@ficc.uu.net (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: indirect reference/use of procedures Message-ID: Date: 15 Mar 90 18:01:08 GMT References: <16702.25FE80FA@urchin.fidonet.org> Organization: Xenix Support, FICC Lines: 12 > void (* myfunc)(); > myfunc (); I realise this is a valid syntax as of X3J11 (or whatever it is now that it's complete), but it's confusing. If nothing else, it breaks the symmetry between usage and declaration. C declaration syntax is confusing enough as it is, and declarations of pointers to functions particularly so. It's better to blow the extra three characters and call "(* myfunc) ();". What did the committee have in mind when they decided to make this syntax part of the standard? -- _--_|\ `-_-' Peter da Silva. +1 713 274 5180. . / \ 'U` \_.--._/ v