This seems like a dangerous assumption to me. William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > > Before I dig into this any further... > > we make a number of assumptions in APR that sizeof(void(*)(void)) == > sizeof(void*). > > By K&R "C: A Reference Manual" 2nd ed 6.1.4 Pointer Sizes... > > "Although function pointers are usually no larger than data pointers, there > are > a few computers on which this is no true ..." > > Is this philiosophy irrelevant for the platforms we support with APR? > > It's mostly an issue in DSOs (possibly not even implemented on such > platforms), > and in the optional_fn code. > > If anyone has a _yes_ or something definative, please speak up. > > Bill >
-- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "Hell is hot, that's never been disputed by anybody."
