From:	Fokkema DOT DBRA AT delorie DOT com, 1043730 <dfokkema AT cs DOT vu DOT nl>
Newsgroups:	comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject:	Re: far pointers again
Date:	Thu, 7 Oct 1999 08:57:18 GMT
Organization:	Fac. Wiskunde & Informatica, VU, Amsterdam
Lines:	13
Message-ID:	<7thn9e$cil@cs.vu.nl>
References:	<E1FF8239A075D311AF7200A0C9D60AE30804E3 AT probe-2 DOT acclaim-euro DOT net> <7tf476$8qj AT cs DOT vu DOT nl> <7tff80$2kp AT acp3bf DOT knirsch DOT de>
NNTP-Posting-Host:	galjas.cs.vu.nl
X-Newsreader:	TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
X-Poster-Key:	sha1:7Jz2kF7gbXA1K5CE+Y40UF6ki3s=
Cancel-Lock:	sha1:PlY/qkXDxQ275Qjhv1C3UPed9FI=
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway:	from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT acp3bf DOT knirsch DOT de) wrote:
: As soon as you add the 'far' keyword, one of the most fundamental
: assumptions in C breaks down: a pointer is a pointer is a pointer.
What exactly do you mean by that? Does this also go for a pointer to a char?
Why does 'far' breaks this concept down?

: "Many millions of flies eat sh*t. So we should eat it, as well." or
: what? This argument has never been a good one.
It was not an argument. Just a statement. With all due respect, that it is
sh*t is just your opinion. Maybe that of countless others too, but it is still
an opinion.

David

- Raw text -