I am porting some code to an 8051. (header.h)
typedef int (Writer) (int , u_char * , u_char , size_t , u_char * , int *) reentrant;
Writer bob;
. . . int bob(int val1, u_char * dat1, u_char dat2, size_t val2, u_char * dat3, int *pval) reentrant { }
//Comment out Writer bob; int (bob)(int val1, u_char * dat1, u_char dat2, size_t val2, u_char * dat3, int *pval) reentrant;
Hans-Bernhard, Yes, I made a mistake in calling this a function pointer type instead of a function type. The function type seems like the best approach since the function type is being passed in many functions and structures and it wouldn't make sense to redefine the entire function each time. Thank you for the suggestions and comments. I have tried to do the following:
Write bob reentrant;
The function type seems like the best approach since the function type is being passed in many functions and structures and it wouldn't make sense to redefine the entire function each time. This sounds like you're mighty confused about what C can do and what it can't. Maybe you've read to much stuff about the mythical, but non-existant language "C/C++", or simply confuse C++ with C here. There's no way at all you can pass a function around in C, nor can you put one into a structure. You can declare a function type, and even a function object, but you can't assign such objects, nor do anything much else with them. In C, that will always have to be a pointer to a function instead. Which is a major reason why you'll hardly ever see a typedef like your Writer in anybody's C sources. While function types formally exist, they are hardly ever actually used in a way where it would help a lot to give them a name instead of just spelling out the actual function's declaration in full. Whenever you need to do something like that, it's almost certainly a pointer-to-function you really need, anyway.