Dmitry Potapov wrote: > On Tue, Sep 23, 2008 at 04:37:14PM +0200, Alex Riesen wrote: >> 2008/9/23 Dmitry Potapov <dpotapov@xxxxxxxxx>: >>> +stat_fn_t cygwin_stat_fn = cygwin_stat_choice; >>> +stat_fn_t cygwin_lstat_fn = cygwin_lstat_choice; >> ... >>> +typedef int (*stat_fn_t)(const char*, struct stat*); >>> +extern stat_fn_t cygwin_stat_fn; >>> +extern stat_fn_t cygwin_lstat_fn; >> >> extern int (*cygwin_stat_fn)(const char *, struct stat *); >> >> Is shorter, easier to read and easier to understand (for a C person). >> You don't even use the type anywhere else, it is just for the declaration sake! > > I use it in description of a parameter of another function: > > static int do_stat(const char *file_name, struct stat *buf, stat_fn_t cygstat) > > Of course, you can avoid it here too, but the declaration will become > somewhat longer: > > static int do_stat(const char *file_name, struct stat *buf, > int (*cygstat)(const char *, struct stat *)); > > so I am not sure that removing stat_fn_t improves readability, but if > there are other people who think so, I will correct that. I think that using typedef here definitly improves readibility. You don't have to carefully analyse if you can pass cygwin_stat_fn to do_stat function or not. -- Jakub Narebski Warsaw, Poland ShadeHawk on #git -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
