From: david.brown@hesbynett.no   
      
   On 02/01/2026 23:18, Chris M. Thomasson wrote:   
   > On 1/2/2026 1:52 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> On 2026-01-02, Michael Sanders  wrote:   
   >>> On Fri, 2 Jan 2026 17:48:16 -0000 (UTC), Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 2026-01-02, Michael Sanders  wrote:   
   >>>>> B: because every function must have a return type   
   >>>>>     *including function pointers*?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> What it is you think type is, in the context of C?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> Does type survive into run-time?   
   >>>>   
   >>>> If a function pointer is missing type information about return type,   
   >>>> and   
   >>>> that function pointer is needed for expressing a function call, where   
   >>>> does the compiler get the type from?   
   >>>   
   >>> Its void that's throwing me Kaz. I'm not sure what to think when   
   >>> it comes to void pointers.   
   >>   
   >> Because you teleported here from 1985.   
   >   
   > [...]   
   >   
   > One note, void* cannot hold a function pointer without getting undefined   
   > or implementation-defined behavior.   
   >   
      
   Kaz mentioned several types that "void *" is a generic /object/ pointer.   
     Functions are not objects - pointers to functions are completely   
   different from pointers to objects.  You can't mix them without "I know   
   what I am doing" explicit casts, with non-portable behaviour and a   
   serious risk of UB.   
      
   > typedef void (*generic_func_ptr)(void)   
      
   There is no generic function pointer type equivalent to "void *" - you   
   are always going to need casts when converting between different pointer   
   types.  And you /really/ need to make sure you convert to exactly the   
   correct type before calling the pointed-to function.  But the definition   
   you gave here is commonly used when people want to have generic function   
   pointers.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)