Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c > #64436

Re: declarator

From Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.c
Subject Re: declarator
Date 2015-06-29 11:22 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <877fqmerut.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References <mmq8l7$qcm$1@dont-email.me> <7936ac41-8011-4164-84c3-28727b620f0a@googlegroups.com> <mmqash$865$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw

"Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> writes:

> "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> news:7936ac41-8011-4164-84c3-28727b620f0a@googlegroups.com...
>> It's an indirect function. Call with g().
>
>     So *g() is a pointer to a function that returns nothing and takes no 
> arguments basically right?

No.  You originally asked about void (*g)(void); and *g() is something
else entirely (for one thing it's a fragment which could be part of
either an expression or part of a declaration).  You'll have to be exact
if you want to understand this stuff because the details matter a lot.
In particular, empty brackets in a function declaration don't mean "no
arguments", they mean "an un-stated number of argument which might be
none".  To say none, you write (void) in that position, as you had in
your original posting.

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-28 21:58 -0400
  declarator "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 19:14 -0700
    Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-28 22:36 -0400
      Re: declarator "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-06-28 19:46 -0700
      Re: declarator Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-29 11:22 +0100
        Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-29 16:07 -0400
        Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-29 16:09 -0400
  Re: declarator Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-28 21:51 -0700
  Re: declarator Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-06-29 11:08 +0100
    Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-29 16:18 -0400
      Re: declarator Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-29 14:23 -0700
        Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-29 18:39 -0400
        Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-29 20:39 -0400
          Re: declarator Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-29 19:01 -0700
            Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-29 22:13 -0400
              Re: declarator Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-29 20:45 -0700
                Re: declarator Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-06-30 08:22 -0700
                Re: declarator Tim Rentsch <txr@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2015-07-11 08:44 -0700
                Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-06-30 12:48 -0400
                Re: declarator Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@dqel.com> - 2015-06-30 15:32 -0700
                Re: declarator John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2015-07-01 13:50 -0700
                Re: declarator gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2015-07-01 21:57 +0000
                Re: declarator "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> - 2015-07-01 15:05 -0700
                Re: declarator "Bill Cunningham" <nospam@nspam.invalid> - 2015-07-02 20:34 -0400
  Re: declarator Jens Stuckelberger <Jens_Stuckelberger@nowhere.net> - 2015-06-29 14:55 +0000

csiph-web