Wed, 03 Jan 2001 12:27:20 +1100, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> pisze:
> This means that we should not provide
>
> castFunPtrToPtr :: FunPtr a -> Ptr b
> castPtrToFunPtr :: Ptr a -> FunPtr b
It does not mean that, because existing C libraries are usually
non-portable and some do require using such casts, however meaningless
they could be.
> Has anybody ever used these casts?
Yes: me, for the readline library.
> As long as `FunPtr' is used for f.e.d., I don't see much use in
> these casts. It certainly doesn't make much sense to peek and poke
> an address produced by f.e.d.
But it's used to pass either a function pointer cast to a data pointer
or a real data pointer to a function, together with an enumeration
value indicating which one is this. Ugly, but that's life.
Another example is dlopen.
We could remove these casts, but they will be used anyway: they
would have to be produced by wrapping a C function (relying on the
implementation of both in terms of Addr forever might be not the
best practice, especially if function pointers on IA-64 are 16 bits -
I'm for 90% sure about this).
--
__("< Marcin Kowalczyk * [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://qrczak.ids.net.pl/
\__/
^^ SYGNATURA ZASTĘPCZA
QRCZAK
_______________________________________________
FFI mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/ffi
