Standard type for code pointers?

[Joseph Koshy]

> Except that intptr_t need only be large enough to hold an 
> object pointer.  This is not necessarily enough to hold a 
> function pointer.

Right.

> The only standard types that are guaranteed to be able to hold
> a function pointer are other function pointers.

Right, but there doesn't seem to be a C99 name for function
pointer types.

Is 'register_t' guaranteed to be wide enough?

-- 
FreeBSD Volunteer, http://people.freebsd.org/~jkoshy