Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: %p and different pointer representations
Message-ID: <9782@smoke.BRL.MIL>
Date: 3 Mar 89 16:25:35 GMT
References: <11915@haddock.ima.isc.com> <9765@smoke.BRL.MIL> <9571@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU>
Reply-To: gwyn@brl.arpa (Doug Gwyn (VLD/VMB) <gwyn>)
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab (BRL), APG, MD.
Lines: 11

In article <9571@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> scs@adam.pika.mit.edu (Steve Summit) writes:
>I will have to use a variation on this union in the symbol table
>and the rvalue structure of a C interpreter I wrote once, if I
>ever want it to pass ANSI muster.  (I'm not sure I'll bother.)

It's not a question of ANSI C; you have to do it right if your code
is going to be maximally portable, quite apart from ANSI C.  X3J11
did not invent the distinction between code and data addresses; they
simply acknowledged that there often is a distinction and that it
would be prohibitively expensive to have to disguise this distinction
in some common environments.