Re: [AD] got rid of END_OF_MAIN()

[Michael Benfield <leftfist@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Aug 9, 2004, at 3:11 AM, Chris wrote:
> Hm, ok. I think, when you do a change like this, it's best to just do 
> what's necesarry to make the patch work. Having all that extra stuff 
> in the patch (doc changes, example changes, etc), IMO, is unnecessary 
> until you get conformation that the change will be accepted.. it saves 
> you time from having to do all the changes prematurely, and it save us 
> time from having to look through the patch to find where the 
> actual/important changes are. Most people look at the .diff itself to 
> see what you're changing so having a lot of extra stuff in it makes it 
> harder to find the real changes.

OK that's what I'll do in the future. I figured the more that was done 
the more likely it would get accepted but that makes sense.

> That said, I think your idea has some merit. Although I would probably 
> change the implemtation some. The big question I need to ask is: what 
> would happen if you forcibly pass arguments to a function that takes 
> (void)? Like this:

This actually seems to work under gcc at least. Although I think you 
have to cast the fp to the correct type:
void (*main2)(int, char **) = (void (*) (int, char**) &_mangled_main;

I didn't really think about this. I guess that means it can be changed 
such that the user can define his main using void or int, char **.

Mike Benfield