Re: [OT] A bit confused on pointers...
Re: [OT] A bit confused on pointers...
- Subject: Re: [OT] A bit confused on pointers...
- From: Scott Ribe <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2005 12:40:12 -0700
- Thread-topic: [OT] A bit confused on pointers...
>
When I try to go farther by having a function return a function:
>
>
static int (*f3)()(); //{ return f1; }
It's a gnarly precedence/parsing problem, and this is the solution:
static int f1() { return 0; }
static int (*(f3)())() { return f1; }
I'm not defending the rules, just pointing out that it can be done ;-) In
your typedef, you were saying "foo_t is a pointer to a function..." In this
statement you do not want to say "f3 is a pointer to a function..." you want
to say "f3 is a function returning a pointer to an unnamed function..."
I'm going to stop now, because when I read that it starts to sound rather
scarily as though I know what I'm talking about. And I guess I do at least a
little, but I'm pushing it here...
--
Scott Ribe
email@hidden
http://www.killerbytes.com/
(303) 665-7007 voice
_______________________________________________
Do not post admin requests to the list. They will be ignored.
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden