From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1e82cb45ab839370
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: Tucker Taft <stt@averstar.com>
Subject: Re: Interfaces.C and void *
Date: 1999/09/22
Message-ID: <37E90F43.C65F6703@averstar.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 528299155
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: news@inmet.camb.inmet.com (USENET news)
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: houdini.burl.averstar.com
References: <87btavxw93.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>
X-Accept-Language: en
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Organization: AverStar (formerly Intermetrics)  Burlington, MA  USA
Mime-Version: 1.0
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1999-09-22T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
> Recently, I wrote a binding for a C library which provides an abstract
> data type and completely hides the underlying representation of the type
> (i.e., all the public routines work on pointers to void).
> 
> Is there really no portable equivalent of a C void * in Interfaces.C?
> I used Interfaces.C.Strings.chars_ptr, which should be quite portable in
> practice, but AFAIK, ISO C doesn't require the representation of void *
> and char * to be identical.

Adding a void_ptr to Interfaces.C would seem like a reasonable addendum
to the standard.  In the interim, I would define a type in your own
code, such as:
    type Void_Ptr is private;
   ...
    type Void_Ptr is new System.Address;

This way, you will only need to change the definition in one place
if that becomes necessary (which I doubt, in practice).

-- 
-Tucker Taft   stt@averstar.com   http://www.averstar.com/~stt/
Technical Director, Distributed IT Solutions  (www.averstar.com/tools)
AverStar (formerly Intermetrics, Inc.)   Burlington, MA  USA