From: ron@ronnatalie.com (Ron Natalie)
Subject: [TUHS] C declarations.
Date: Thu, 11 May 2017 17:49:31 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <015401d2caa0$79762650$6c6272f0$@ronnatalie.com> (raw)
Bjarne agrees with you. He put the * (and the &) with the type name to emphasize it is part of the type.
This works fine as long as you only use one declaration per statement.
The problem with that is that * doesn't really bind to the type name. It binds to the variable.
char* cp1, cp2; // cp1 is pointer to char, cp2 is just a char.
I always found it confusing that the * is used to indicate an pointer here, where as when you want to change an lvalue to a pointer, you use &.
But if we're going to gripe about the evolution of C. My biggest gripe is when they fixed structs to be real types, they didn't also do so for arrays.
Arrays and their degeneration to poitners is one of the biggest annoyances in C.
> Am I the only one here who thinks that e.g. a char pointer should be
> "char* cp1, cp2" instead of "char *cp1, *cp2"? I.e. the fundamental type is "char*", not "char", and to this day I still write:
next reply other threads:[~2017-05-11 21:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 48+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-05-11 21:49 Ron Natalie [this message]
2017-05-11 22:01 ` Arthur Krewat
2017-05-11 23:44 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-11 22:03 ` David Arnold
2017-05-11 22:32 ` Larry McVoy
2017-05-11 22:41 ` Ron Natalie
2017-05-13 1:24 ` Larry McVoy
2017-05-13 2:45 ` Ron Natalie
2017-05-13 12:20 ` Michael Kjörling
2017-05-13 12:35 ` Tim Bradshaw
2017-05-13 12:42 ` Michael Kjörling
2017-05-13 15:36 ` Stephen Kitt
2017-05-14 1:59 ` Lawrence Stewart
2017-05-14 2:23 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-14 4:24 ` Bakul Shah
2017-05-14 6:12 ` Steve Johnson
2017-05-14 6:48 ` Bakul Shah
2017-05-14 23:06 ` Ron Natalie
2017-05-14 23:34 ` Arthur Krewat
2017-05-15 0:14 ` Dan Cross
2017-05-15 0:23 ` Ron Natalie
2017-05-15 3:43 ` Random832
2017-05-15 0:40 ` Larry McVoy
2017-05-15 2:00 ` Nevin Liber
2017-05-15 10:21 ` Tony Finch
2017-05-15 4:35 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-15 4:54 ` Bakul Shah
2017-05-15 5:01 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-15 12:58 ` Michael Kjörling
2017-05-15 16:58 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-15 19:00 ` [TUHS] cdecl (Re: " Bakul Shah
2017-05-15 22:52 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-13 13:46 ` [TUHS] " Hellwig Geisse
2017-05-13 19:08 ` Random832
2017-05-13 23:21 ` Dave Horsfall
2017-05-14 14:48 ` Nemo
2017-05-13 19:05 ` Random832
2017-05-14 13:14 ` Derek Fawcus
2017-05-12 0:15 ` Bakul Shah
2017-05-12 2:41 ` Theo Pavlidis
2017-05-12 14:04 Richard Tobin
2017-05-13 23:11 Richard Tobin
2017-05-15 6:46 ` Tim Bradshaw
2017-05-14 14:11 Doug McIlroy
2017-05-14 14:58 ` Steve Nickolas
2017-05-15 18:47 Steve Johnson
2017-05-15 19:54 ` Bakul Shah
2017-05-16 7:25 ` George Ross
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='015401d2caa0$79762650$6c6272f0$@ronnatalie.com' \
--to=ron@ronnatalie.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).