Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!bellcore!faline!ulysses!allegra!princeton!udel!gatech!purdue!umd5!brl-adm!brl-smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-smoke.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: procedure pointer question
Keywords: C function pointer
Message-ID: <7110@brl-smoke.ARPA>
Date: 16 Jan 88 08:51:20 GMT
References: <861@xn.LL.MIT.EDU> <7108@brl-smoke.ARPA> <4002@june.cs.washington.edu>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 19
Posted: Sat Jan 16 03:51:20 1988

In article <4002@june.cs.washington.edu> pardo@uw-june.UUCP (David Keppel) writes:
>[ (***sin)(x) <=> (**sin)(x) <=> (*sin)(x) <=> (&sin)(x) <=> sin(x) ]
>Bleah!

This part I understand!

>How do I tell the difference between a pointer to a function,
>a pointer to a pointer to a function, etc.?

But this part I don't -- the above strange property has almost nothing
to do with types.  You still have to declare the types of pointers-to-
functions properly.

>Is this some strange "feature" of the C compiler, is the type of pointer
>to function actually "pointer to (pointer to (pointer to (...", or is
>there a _reason_ for this?

I explained the reasons when I gave the example.  They have to do with
the rules for evaluating expressions.