On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 08:29:35PM -0700, Chris Torek wrote: > 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. Ack, serves me right for starting a discussion based on operator precedence. Yes, you're right, I was mistaken and forgot that -> binds with highest precedence in C (above *, which is why this doesn't work). In any case, my confusion is probably a good reason to avoid this entirely by manipulating a variable which stores *p_progress. Thanks, Taylor
