Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/3/84; site talcott.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!swa
From: swa@talcott.UUCP (Shakalneer)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: void (*Problem)() = VoidFun;
Message-ID: <420@talcott.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 21-Apr-85 17:36:41 EST
Article-I.D.: talcott.420
Posted: Sun Apr 21 17:36:41 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 24-Apr-85 02:13:56 EST
References: <10339@brunix.UUCP>
Organization: Harvard University
Lines: 16

> Can anyone explain this problem with void?  I give a parallel example
> with pointers to functions returning ints just as an example that
> works.  I don't understand why you can't have a pointer to a function
> returning void.
> 
>     void (*VoidPoint)();

This is a bug in the c compiler.  I once ran into it on a BSD 4.1 system.
It should work.  It won't.  You'll have to (yeech) declare it of type integer
instead of void.
-- 
Let the beauty we love be what we do.

Steven Augart
{harvard,wjh12}!talcott!swa		(617) 497-7412, 495-3864
swa%talcott@harvard.arpa		AUGART%HARVUNXT.BITNET