Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!hc!beta!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: interesting type problem
Message-ID: <6462@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: Thu, 24-Sep-87 01:19:37 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-smok.6462
Posted: Thu Sep 24 01:19:37 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 26-Sep-87 10:22:27 EDT
References: <8626@utzoo.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 9

In article <8626@utzoo.UUCP> henry@utzoo.UUCP (Henry Spencer) writes:
>I'm not advocating a change to C to fix this.  I was just a bit bemused by
>the discovery of the situation, and thought others might be interested.

Whitesmiths had a similar problem declaring the type of the functions
whose addresses were to be passed to their their onexit() function; at
process termination, the onexit function stack "unwound", with each
function responsible for returning a pointer to the next such function.
That's obviously a recursive type...