Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!mcnc!rti!dg-rtp!throopw
From: throopw@dg-rtp.UUCP (Wayne A. Throop)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Type checking in conditional expressions
Message-ID: <342@dg-rtp.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 19-Oct-87 19:01:45 EDT
Article-I.D.: dg-rtp.342
Posted: Mon Oct 19 19:01:45 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 21-Oct-87 00:05:51 EDT
References: <186@wright.EDU>
Organization: Data General, RTP NC.
Lines: 20

> jholbach@wright.EDU (Jim Holbach)
> To provide [better typechecking] I created some macros of the form
> #define PROCNAME(a,b)	procname(0?dummy_a:(a),0?dummy_b:(b))
> [...] I have a function which expects 
> a function to be passed to it. So my dummy variable is declared as 
> "void (*dummy_func)()". But when I invoke the macro using the name
> of the function as an argument, the compiler complains 
> "operands of : have incompatible types".

This is a symptom of pcc's odd and hacked-in treatment of the void type.
Our non-pcc-based compiler gets this correct, as does our non-pcc-based
typechecker, but lint barfs all over it.  If "void" is replaced by
"int", the problem goes away.

Suggestion: some of the fixes Guy Harris has posted over the last few
years to pcc and lint may make the problem go away.

--
The seeds of crime bear bitter fruit.   --- Dick Tracy
-- 
Wayne Throop      <the-known-world>!mcnc!rti!xyzzy!throopw