Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!lll-tis!helios.ee.lbl.gov!pasteur!ames!nrl-cmf!cmcl2!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!shopiro
From: shopiro@alice.UUCP (Jonathan Shopiro)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Pointers to functions (was Re: Pointers to Inline Members)
Summary: use typedefs for function pointers
Message-ID: <8147@alice.UUCP>
Date: 30 Aug 88 14:13:34 GMT
References: <3690002@wdl1.UUCP> <8808271631.AA21050@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill NJ
Lines: 23

In article <8808271631.AA21050@explorer.dgp.toronto.edu>, flaps@dgp.toronto.edu (Alan J Rosenthal) writes:
> 
> ...
> While testing this, I found the compiler unwilling to take a local
> declaration of the form:
> 	int (*f)(int);

This question seems to come up pretty often.  The problem is a due to
a limitation of the compiler.  The solution is to use a typedef, e.g.,

	typedef int	FINT(int);
	FINT*	fp;

or

	typedef int	(*FINTP)(int);
	FINTP	fp1;

In the above, fp and fp1 have the same type.  I prefer the first method
because it seems simpler and I like to see stars where there are pointers.
-- 
		Jonathan Shopiro
		AT&T Bell Laboratories, Murray Hill, NJ  07974
		research!shopiro   (201) 582-4179