From 9212299831444641146 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: f78e5,fb1a92fa405c930c X-Google-Attributes: gidf78e5,public From: gbush@my-deja.com Subject: Re: nested functions Date: 1999/06/12 Message-ID: <7jrpss$ogk$1@nnrp1.deja.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 488784764 Approved: Valentin Bonnard References: <7jd4c5$nup$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jjjr6$r02$1@nnrp1.deja.com> <7jma5c$i85@abyss.West.Sun.COM> X-Original-Date: Fri, 11 Jun 1999 20:00:33 GMT X-Authentication-Warning: backdraft.briar.org: smap set sender to using -f X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 4.01; Windows NT) X-Http-Proxy: 1.1 x37.deja.com:80 (Squid/1.1.22) for client 146.225.126.244 Organization: Deja.com - Share what you know. Learn what you don't. X-Article-Creation-Date: Fri Jun 11 20:00:33 1999 GMT X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++ iQBVAwUAN2JrFawEuYhIxRhxAQGHCgIAqF4nXBK3Ts/t0QhlhKSedEOkMrXfqgZA zLaff2vMQwVaVE66NtQIO9LugJMJbKwXY39gMrJo/qFS/IjnhNyOag== =z9dY Newsgroups: comp.std.c++ In article , ark@research.att.com (Andrew Koenig) wrote: > Because otherwise, you can't define a variable > (of type pointer to function) that can potentially > contain the address of a local function or a non-local > function. I think there should be no differences in pointers to the local function or to the global function. They should have exactly the same signatures, so that any function that recieves function pointer could call equally successfully local and global function through that pointer. Since local functions are visible only in the scope where they are defined such a call could be made only from the same scope. Gene. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Share what you know. Learn what you don't. --- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. To submit articles, try just posting with ] [ your news-reader. If that fails, use mailto:std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu ] [ --- Please see the FAQ before posting. --- ] [ FAQ: http://reality.sgi.com/austern_mti/std-c++/faq.html ]