Re: A C without void*

From	"MikeP" <mp011011@some.org>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: A C without void*
Date	2011-07-05 00:29 -0500
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<iuu7ft$h9p$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<%1thp.70888$2_5.22463@newsfe25.ams2>

Show all headers | View raw

Spiros Bousbouras wrote:
> Why does C have void* ? Imagine a C' where the functionality that
> void* provides would be provided instead by unsigned char* plus what
> unsigned char* usually does. In what way would C' be inferior to C ?''

Well you fucked up that question royally.

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

Thread

Re: A C without void* "MikeP" <mp011011@some.org> - 2011-07-05 00:29 -0500
  Re: A C without void* Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-07-05 08:46 -0700
  Re: A C without void* Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-07 22:11 +0300
    Re: A C without void* James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-07-07 22:46 -0400
    Re: A C without void* Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-07-09 02:58 +0100
    Re: A C without void* Dr Nick <3-nospam@temporary-address.org.uk> - 2011-07-09 07:18 +0100
      Re: A C without void* Phil Carmody <thefatphil_demunged@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-07-10 04:39 +0300

csiph-web