ralph
9/3/2010 9:45:00 PM
On Fri, 03 Sep 2010 21:29:25 +0100, Robert <noname@noserver.com>
wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Sep 2010 14:22:34 -0500, dpb <none@non.net> wrote:
>
>>Robert wrote:
>>...
>>
>>Nomenclature nit...
>>
>>DLL entry points identified by ordinal number are not "function pointers"...
>
>Yes, sorry about that.
>
>I was thrown by the MSDN documentation for these functions which
>states:
>
>.... "is not exported by name or declared in a public header file. To
>use it, you must use GetProcAddress and request ordinal 11 from
>ComCtl32.dll to obtain a function pointer."
Yeah, you will see the term "pointer" a lot when people actually mean
a "Address", especially when describing System services, etc. since
most 'system' programmers are C programmers.
To be really picky - the term "pointer" shouldn't be used any time
outside the scope of a language that actually supports a 'pointer data
type' (especially never in VB or Java) - they should always use the
more correct term "address".
But such a admonishment will only start a fight. <bg>
-ralph