On 29-Mar-2000, Manuel M. T. Chakravarty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The code
>
> void *p;
> struct foo *x;
> struct bar *y;
>
> p = x; /* (1) */
> y = x; /* (2) */
>
> compiles at (1) without problems, but gives a warning at
> (2).
Actually whether it is an error or a warning is implementation-dependent.
Some C compilers, for example lcc, will report an error for this. Likewise
`gcc -pedantic-errors' will report an error.
The code is not strictly conforming C, and the C standard requires the
compiler to issue a diagnostic, but a diagnostic can be either an error or a
warning. (The only thing the C 99 standard requires an error for is the
#error directive.)
> I think that's actually a good idea. In fact, as this does
> not raise a compile time error, but only a warning, it
> doesn't prevent you at all from doing nasty things at the C
> side (if you entertain such thoughts),
As noted above, with some C compilers it is an error, but in that case you can
easily avoid the error by inserting a cast, so I think your point still holds.
--
Fergus Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | "I have always known that the pursuit
WWW: <http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~fjh> | of excellence is a lethal habit"
PGP: finger [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- the last words of T. S. Garp.
