Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!know!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!lavaca.uh.edu!menudo.uh.edu!sugar!ficc!peter
From: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Newsgroups: comp.std.c
Subject: Re: X3J11 Pleasanton meeting summary
Keywords: X3J11 Pleasanton meeting C standard interpretations
Message-ID: <CR86-.7@xds13.ferranti.com>
Date: 7 Oct 90 00:39:43 GMT
References: <13996@smoke.BRL.MIL> <3206@mcrware.UUCP> <470@taumet.com> <1990Oct4.233557.28571@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva)
Organization: Xenix Support, FICC
Lines: 24

In article <1990Oct4.233557.28571@watdragon.waterloo.edu> ccplumb@spurge.uwaterloo.ca (Colin Plumb) writes:
> I have to agree with Henry, though, in saying that "needed" is hoplessly
> vague.  Given an incomplete type Foo, here are the things I can imagine
> doing with it:

> extern Foo variable;
...

Also:

extern Foo *variable;
Foo *variable;
{ Foo *variable; }
Foo *function(...);
Foo *function(...){...}
extern Foo *variable[];
Foo *variable[];
sizeof(Foo *);

All of which should probably be legal... unless pointers to structures
can vary in size, or you dereference !variable! or the return value of
!function!. The latter two can be checked out, but how about varying
size pointers to structures (eg, !struct {char c};! having the same align
restrictions as !char! and requiring a longer pointer than !int *!)?
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
+1 713 274 5180.   'U`
peter@ferranti.com