appro> Just to make it clear. Are you going to pass the union by
appro> reference of by value? You have to pass by reference which is
appro> equivalent to what I proposed, but without unions. Passing by
appro> value would be wrong and compiler should complain.
As you have probably seen by now, I don't pass around any unions at
all, I just use them as instruments to convert pointers. You see, I
absolutely wanted to keep binary compatibility for now, or we would
see a lot of things break silently all over the place, since most of
these things happen in places where regular char pointers are passed
as parameters as well (the diverse _ctrl() functions, for example).
But it's very possible that we can make things more elegant, and also
more complicated. We most apparently have pointers "of variable
type", which basically is a union. For those parameters, we could
simply enforce the use of a union, and provide a few macros to make it
easier to handle. (oh, and yes, before you ask, in my min that union
would be passed around by reference :-), but then we have the problem
of handling temporary instances nicely)
appro> > DEC C will complain.
appro> Shall we bet:-)
Nope, you were right about that one.
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannvägen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Redakteur@Stacken \ S-161 43 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
\ SWEDEN \ or +46-708-26 53 44
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
