Addresses of static functions

[Joseph S. D. Yao]

> >it's worth it.  Just have, for each static whose address is taken in
> >the module, a long-return (unnamed) function whose sole purpose is
> >to copy the args back onto the stack and do a short-call to the static
> ... [suggests, essentially, making statics long-return just like externs,
>	then doesn't like it] ...
> Or you could choose a different CPU.

I like that last choice best.  The 80*86 architecture never made me
happy.  Unfortunately, right about now the best selling u-chip is the
80*86 family, judging from the number of implementations I've seen.
Least expensive, first in the market (~), IBM-approved, etc.  Don't
flame me for those observations -- they're what is.	;-S

Joe Yao		hadron!jsdy at seismo.{ARPA,UUCP}