News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Building a C Compiler Type System – Part 1: The Formidable Declarator. Parent comment

Re:Building a C Compiler Type System – Part 1: The Formidabl... by Someone on Thursday July 07, 2016 @02:21PM (#12051153)
Also, we have

  int *p, q;
which says "p is a pointer to integer; q is an integer". That's an argument against writing

  int* p, q;
because that suggests that both p and q are pointers to integer.

And yes, you can write (IIRC)

  int q, *p;
(See also http://www.stroustrup.com/bs_faq2.html#whitespace)
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Building a C Compiler Type System – Part 1: The Formidabl... by Avernar on Friday July 08, 2016 @05:53AM (#12054476)
That's why I declare pointer variables one to a line. Wish the language would work the other way with the asterisk associativity. Mainly because this just looks wrong to me:

  int *p, *q;

  typedef int *intp;
  intp p, q;
That just screams that the * belongs to the type and not the variable name.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Building a C Compiler Type System – Part 1: The Formidabl... by dllthomas on Friday July 08, 2016 @01:31AM (#12053702)
YRC
[ Parent | on HN ]