On Sat, 22 Nov 2008, Kevin D. Kissell wrote:
> [This should be good for some useless weekend flaming.]
Yeah! ;-)
> Chad Reese wrote:
> to move away from such arbitrary dogmatism. The argument given for banning
> typedefs altogether is that nested typedefs are confusing to programmers. I
I thought the main reason was that you can't have forward declarations of
typedefs, while you can have for structs.
Hence
typedef struct {
...
b_t *p;
} a_t;
typedef struct {
...
a_t *p;
} b_t;
won't fly.
Gr{oetje,eeting}s,
Geert
--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
-- Linus Torvalds
