Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site molihp.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utcsri!ubc-vision!molihp!martinl
From: martinl@molihp.UUCP (Martin M Lacey)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Pointers to Functions
Message-ID: <135@molihp.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 14-Jan-86 18:55:06 EST
Article-I.D.: molihp.135
Posted: Tue Jan 14 18:55:06 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 15-Jan-86 08:46:38 EST
References: <59@andromeda.UUCP>
Reply-To: martinl@HP-UX.UUCP (Martin M Lacey)
Organization: Moli Energy, Vancouver, B.C., CANADA
Lines: 31
Summary: 

In article <59@andromeda.UUCP> dave@andromeda.UUCP (Dave Bloom) writes:
><>
>Here's a good(?) question. Lets say I have this:
>
>main()
>{
>	int a(), b();  /* defined somewhere else */
>	int (*c)();    /* a pointer to a function returning int (K&R pg141) */
>		.
>		.
>		.
>	c = b;
>	(*c)(some arguments);
>}
>
>Our compiler claims c is an "illegal function", 
> [...]
>Looks like I'm missing something. Can anyone out the lend me a hand???
>What is it that's wrong in example one? How can I declare a generic pointer
>to an int-function, set it equal to the address of a valid int function,
>and use it instead of the function????
>
>Thanx.
>-- 
>     			       Dave Bloom


I have just tested the above on our system (Sys 5 rel 2: HP9000 series 500)
and it works no problem.  Your compiler is out-dated probably.

		Magic Martin.