Re: RFC 334 (v1) I'm {STILL} trying to understand this...

[Dan Sugalski]

At 10:16 AM 10/13/00 +0100, Nicholas Clark wrote:
>On Thu, Oct 12, 2000 at 03:24:23PM -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> > Dan Sugalski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> > > C's vararg handling sucks in many sublime and profound ways. It does,
> > > though, work. If we declare in advance that all C-visible perl functions
> > > have an official parameter list of (...), then we can make it work. The
> > > calling program would just fetch function pointers from us somehow, and
> > > do the call in.
> >
> > Can't.  ISO C requires that all variadic functions take at least one named
> > parameter.  The best you can do is something like (void *, ...).
>
>(Perl_Interpreter *, ...)
>surely?

That'd be a good one, except we're trying to avoid that if we can... :(

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk