void*

[John F. Haugh II]

In article <13499 at smoke.BRL.MIL> gwyn at smoke.BRL.MIL (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>In article <40624 at mips.mips.COM> sah at mips.COM (Steve Hanson) writes:
>>however the inc/dec cause a temporary variable to be introduced:
>
>That could be avoided by defining the function as
>	void *memchr(const char *s, int c, unsigned int n)
>which works because of the "same representation" requirement.

Doesn't this defeat the purpose of (void *) as an abstraction
mechanism?
-- 
John F. Haugh II                             UUCP: ...!cs.utexas.edu!rpp386!jfh
Ma Bell: (512) 832-8832                           Domain: jfh at rpp386.cactus.org