Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!cmcl2!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: (char *) and (void *)
Message-ID: <6857@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 17 Dec 87 20:23:57 GMT
References: <6829@brl-smoke.ARPA> <455@xyzzy.UUCP>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 14

In article <455@xyzzy.UUCP> throopw@xyzzy.UUCP (Wayne A. Throop) writes:
-> gwyn@brl-smoke.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
-> Pointers to the same object are now guaranteed to compare equal.
-> All types of null pointer compare equal.  (char *) and (void *)
-> have the same representation.
-What was the rationale for restricting implementors in this way?  It
-seems a totally useless restriction, and has potentially cripling effect
-on debugging-enhanced implementations.

As I recall, the main argument was that lots of existing code is using
(char *) data with library routines that we now say take (void *)
parameters, without including a header that can declare them using
prototypes (to get automatic parameter type conversion).  It was desired
that such code continue to work when linked with the new ANSI C library.