Re: get rid of Pointer type, mostly

> On Dec 8, 2025, at 18:25, David Geier <geidav(dot)pg(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Hi Peter,
>> I went with your proposal of GinExtraPointer. See attached patch. It's
>> based on the series of patches from Peter's initial mail. I've included
>> the removal of the Pointer typedef in the same patch.
>
> It seems to me that we reached agreement. Are you planning to still
> apply these patches?
>

Basically I am not against this patch, as 756a43689324b473ee07549a6eb7a53a203df5ad has done similar changes.

What I want to understand is that why do we delete Pointer and add GinExtraPointer?

```
-/*
- * Pointer
- * Variable holding address of any memory resident object.
- * (obsolescent; use void * or char *)
- */
-typedef void *Pointer;
```

And
```
+typedef void *GinExtraPointer;
```

They both are underlying “void *”. Are we expecting to improve code readability? More specific maybe?

Best regards,
--
Chao Li (Evan)
HighGo Software Co., Ltd.
https://www.highgo.com/