> On Wed, 2017-10-18 at 10:44 +0000, Alexander.Steffen@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: > > > For instance, nothing about > > > > > sizeof(type) > > > > > vs > > > > > sizeof(*ptr) > > > > > makes it easier for a human to read the code. > > > > > > > > If it does not make it easier to read the code for you, then maybe you > > > > should consider that this might not be true for all humans. For me, it > > > > makes it much easier to see at a glance, that code like > > > > ptr=malloc(sizeof(*ptr)) is correct. > > > > > > I don't think there is a perfect solution. > > > > Maybe. But for the second variant the correctness is easier to check, > > How often should > ptr = alloc(sizeof(*ptr)) > be > ptr = alloc(sizeof(**ptr)) Never? Because in that case it probably should be *ptr=alloc(sizeof(**ptr)), unless you are doing something horrible ;-) Alexander
