typedef functions?

I'm having understanding this concept. When I write,

typedef PV(int) {.........}

PV hello(int, int){........}

I don't see how the function could be a type basically. Is it calling that function everytime? Or is hello now another name? If so, I don't see how it could have a different parameter list.

I have never seen typedef used like that and i'm fairly sure that that sort of use is invalid. I'm surprised your compiler did not throw errors at you.

let me show you the example from the book.

typedef void (*SIG_TYP)(int);
typedef void (*SIG_ARG_TYP)(int);
SIG_TYP signal(int, SIG_ARG_TYP);

can anyone explain this?

Assume the following type is defined:

Code:

---

typedef int function_t (int);

---

Then this can be used as:

Code:

---

function_t *myfunction;

---

In this example the function myfunction is of type pointer to function which returns an int and has a parameter of type int.

yes they are function pointers.

typedef void (*SIG_TYP)(int); == pointer to func that takes an int and returns void. aliased as SIG_TYP

typedef void (*SIG_ARG_TYP)(int); == as above but aliased as SIG_ARG_TYP

SIG_TYP signal(int, SIG_ARG_TYP);

function called signal that takes an int and a SIG_ARG_TYP function pointer and returns a pointer to a function of type SIG_TYP. Both of these are only aliases for a pointer to a function that takes an int parameter and returns nothing.

>typedef void (*SIG_TYP)(int);
>typedef void (*SIG_ARG_TYP)(int);

When defining:

SIG_TYP myfunction;
SIG_ARG_TYP myfunction;

then myfunction is a pointer to a function returning void and which has a parameter of type int.

>SIG_TYP signal(int, SIG_ARG_TYP);

Here signal is a pointer to a function of type void which requires an int and a function of type SIG_ARG_TYP.

Note: The typedef of SIG_TYP and the implementation of signal is different. SIG_TYP requires an int as parameter, while signal has a int as parameter AND a variable of type SIG_ARG_TYP. Hmm, I don't understand this. Perhaps a copy-mistake?

I highly doubt it, although it's possible, it's out of Stroustrup's 2000 edition book. I just don't see the correlation between a function and a type. I mean, a struct is just variables, but a function performs an action.

they are not functions. They are pointers to functions.these can be used to call the function.they are just memory addresses. thats all any pointer really is.

>I highly doubt it, although it's possible, it's out of Stroustrup's
>2000 edition book.

It is ANSI C, but I'm not sure about C++.

>I just don't see the correlation between a function and a type. I
>mean, a struct is just variables, but a function performs an
>action.

You can't compare types and functions this way.

Like a variable can be of some type, also a function can be of some type. A struct is a type, but not a variable, though a variable can be of type struct. And in the same way: SIG_TYP is a type, but not a function, though a function can be of type SIG_TYP.