On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 7:56 PM Taylor Blau <me@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >... I was going to comment on the fact that "(*p_progress)->total" could > be written simply as "*p_progress->total", but I'm (a) not sure that I > actually prefer the latter to the former, and (b) I find that kind of > style comment generally useless. Also, it can't. :-) The binding order is wrong; *p_progress->total binds as *(p_progress->total), and `p_progress` has to be followed first, so this just doesn't work. (Go does precedence and operator syntax a bit better than does C, but even in Go one must still parenthesize certain pointer-following operations.) > But it may make sense to sidestep the whole thing and have a "struct > progress *progress = *p_progress" (that is assigned after we check > p_progress to make sure it's non-NULL) like in stop_progress_msg, which > would clean up a lot of this. This is the way to go. Chris
