> > - opcode_t *(*(*opcode_funcs)[2048])(); /* Opcode */
> > - /* function table */
> > - STRING_FUNCS *(*(*string_funcs)[64])(); /* String function table */
> > + opcode_t *(**opcode_funcs)(); /* Opcode function table */
> > + STRING_FUNCS *(**string_funcs)(); /* String function table */
>
> I'm a little unsure about this - where have those array declarations gone
> and why?
If you strip off the return type and argument list, the declaration of
opcode_funcs is
*(*opcode_funcs)[2048]
which is a pointer to an array of function pointers (3 levels of
indirection).
But if you look in interpreter.c, you find
foo = mem_sys_allocate(2048 * sizeof(void *));
...
interpreter->opcode_funcs = (void*)foo;
which allocates the array and assigns it directly to opcode_funcs (2
levels of indirection), and the DO_OP macro has
x = z->opcode_funcs; \\
y = x[*w]; \\
w = (y)(w,z); \\
which expands to
code = (interpreter->opcode_funcs[*code])(code, interpreter);
(again, 2 levels of indirection).
So the declaration of opcode_funcs was at a different level of
indirection than its allocation and use. The compilers weren't
complaining about this because of all the (void *) casts. The IRIX64
compiler did complain, not about indirection levels, but about
assigning data pointers to function pointers.
For dynamic allocation of the opcode_funcs array (as in current code)
the appropriate declaration of opcode_funcs is
opcode_t *(**opcode_funcs)();
For static allocation, write
opcode_t *(*opcode_funcs[2048])();
and drop the mem_sys_allocate.
string_funcs isn't currently used, but I changed its declaration to
match opcode_funcs.
- SWM
