Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!think!harvard!seismo!mcvax!ukc!warwick!cudcv
From: cudcv@daisy.warwick.UUCP (Rob McMahon)
Newsgroups: net.lang.c++
Subject: Re: address of constructor
Message-ID: <145@daisy.warwick.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 7-Apr-86 05:25:32 EST
Article-I.D.: daisy.145
Posted: Mon Apr  7 05:25:32 1986
Date-Received: Thu, 10-Apr-86 00:44:28 EST
References: <5241@alice.uUCp>
Reply-To: cudcv@daisy.warwk.ac.uk (Rob McMahon)
Organization: Computer Unit, Warwick University, UK
Lines: 33

In article <5241@alice.uUCp> bs@alice.UUCP writes:
>
>typedef base* (*PF)(int);
>
>some_function(PF f) {
>	// ...
>	base* p = (*f)(2);	// name a new x or y
>	// ...
>}
>

That reminds me - why do I have to say

typedef int (*PF)(int);
int f ( PF f1 ) { ; }

when I mean

int f ( int (*f1)(int) ) { ; }

which says

"xx.c", line 1: error: syntax error

four times.  I don't want to create a new typedef which I am going to use
once, particularly when writing an include file for others to use, so that
I have to use some obscure name to avoid conflicts.
-- 
UUCP:   ...!mcvax!ukc!warwick!cudcv
JANET:  cudcv@uk.ac.warwk.daisy
ARPA:   cudcv@daisy.warwk.ac.uk
PHONE:  +44 204 523037
Rob McMahon, Computer Unit, Warwick University, Coventry CV4 7AL, England