This is the mail archive of the
gcc-bugs@gcc.gnu.org
mailing list for the GCC project.
c/7272: having problem with pointer to pointer with const in function calling
- From: send2pradeep at yahoo dot com
- To: gcc-gnats at gcc dot gnu dot org
- Date: 11 Jul 2002 11:58:23 -0000
- Subject: c/7272: having problem with pointer to pointer with const in function calling
- Reply-to: send2pradeep at yahoo dot com
>Number: 7272
>Category: c
>Synopsis: having problem with pointer to pointer with const in function calling
>Confidential: no
>Severity: non-critical
>Priority: low
>Responsible: unassigned
>State: open
>Class: rejects-legal
>Submitter-Id: net
>Arrival-Date: Thu Jul 11 05:06:02 PDT 2002
>Closed-Date:
>Last-Modified:
>Originator: Pradeep S
>Release: gcc 2.95.3 suse linux 7.2 build
>Organization:
>Environment:
suse linux 7.2
>Description:
i have a function of following kind. Which means to my understanding, ppi is a pointer to pointer to constant integer. ie (**ppi cannot be modified).
void func(const int **ppi)
{
}
i tried to call this function like this
int main()
{
int **ppi;
//some initialization of ppi stuff
func(ppi);
return 1;
}
when i compile this, i am getting a warning, which i feel wrong.
it says argument has pointer type mismatch.
i am passing a modifiable data to a function which will not modify the data(hence const, in the hope that in future it may be passed some constant, which does happen in my code).
can u tell a scenario in which this can lead to disaster? so, what does the warning signify?
similarly
when formal argument is of type
int *const **pppi;
and actual argument is of type
int ***pppi;
it says a warning.
but it didnot say anything when formal argument is
int *const *ppi
and actual argument is
int **ppi
what is the diff in above three cases that causes first two to throw a warning while third compiled quitely?
am i bugging u too much?
>How-To-Repeat:
not appilcaple
>Fix:
>Release-Note:
>Audit-Trail:
>Unformatted: