Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucsdhub!hp-sdd!hplabs!hp-ses!hpcuhb!hpcllla!hpclisp!hpclwjm!walter
From: walter@hpclwjm.HP.COM (Walter Murray)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Problem with Geometry Handler definition syntax, X11R3
Message-ID: <660068@hpclwjm.HP.COM>
Date: 28 Dec 89 18:38:28 GMT
References: <1989Dec27.221725.9951@tolerant.com>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Calif. Language Lab
Lines: 32

Geoffrey Leach writes:

[abridged to conserve bandwidth]

> typedef enum  { XtGeometryYes } XtGeometryResult;
> typedef XtGeometryResult (*XtGeometryHandler)();
> typedef struct _CompositeClassPart {
> 	XtGeometryHandler geometry_manager;
> }		CompositeClassPart;
> extern XtGeometryHandler foo();
> CompositeClassPart ccp	= { foo };
> /*
> **	And the result from the SVR3.2.2 cc is the warning:
> **	   warning: illegal pointer combination, op =
> **	The key to the complaint appears to be the fact that the
> **	typedef is a pointer to a procedure returning an enum.
> **	Is this a peculiarity of ATT's cc?  Anyone know of a workaround?
> */
----------
No, the compiler is correct.  The code is illegal.  Some compilers
won't complain; some will.  Any ANSI-conforming compiler should
complain.

My guess is that you didn't declare foo() the way you meant to.
Perhaps you meant:

   extern XtGeometryResult foo();

Warning:  I know nothing about the Xt intrinsics.  This is just a guess.

Walter Murray
---