larry@jc3b21.UUCP (Lawrence F. Strickland) (01/15/86)
In the article headed: From: dave@andromeda.UUCP (Dave Bloom) Newsgroups: net.lang.c Subject: Pointers to Functions Message-ID: <59@andromeda.UUCP> Date: Thu, 9-Jan-86 13:46:33 EST Dave Bloom says: > > Here's a good(?) question. Lets say I have this: > > main() > { > int a(), b(); /* defined somewhere else */ > int (*c)(); /* a pointer to a function returning int (K&R pg141) */ > . > . > . > c = b; > (*c)(some arguments); > } > > Our compiler claims c is an "illegal function" ... > Looks like I'm missing something. Can anyone out the lend me a hand??? > What is it that's wrong in example one? How can I declare a generic pointer > to an int-function, set it equal to the address of a valid int function, > and use it instead of the function???? > The above program compiles correctly on a 3b2 Computer running under System V.2. Apparently, the problem is with the compiler used! What are the results on other compilers out there? Mail to me and I will summarize and post. -----Larry Strickland St. Petersburg Jr. College P.O. Box 13489 St. Petersburg, FL 33733 UseNet: ...akgua!akguc!codas!peora!ucf-cs!usfvax2!3b2bame!jc3b21!larry