delorie.com/archives/browse.cgi | search |
From: | gfoot AT mc31 DOT merton DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk (George Foot) |
Newsgroups: | comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Subject: | Re: DJGPP Structs |
Date: | 3 Mar 1997 16:50:54 GMT |
Organization: | Oxford University |
Lines: | 18 |
Message-ID: | <5fevhe$qpj@news.ox.ac.uk> |
References: | <01bc2673$a4dbe420$8e54dec2 AT satan> <5faj2g$j35 AT news DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> <5fdlnu$mdt AT freenet-news DOT carleton DOT ca> |
NNTP-Posting-Host: | mc31.merton.ox.ac.uk |
To: | djgpp AT delorie DOT com |
DJ-Gateway: | from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp |
Paul Derbyshire (ao950 AT FreeNet DOT Carleton DOT CA) wrote: : And shouldn't he either be saying struct defPt *, or else : typedef struct defPt { : ... : } defPt; In C++, the 'typedef' can be omitted from the definition of struct defPt, and the 'struct' can be omitted from the definition/declaration of variables of that type. I don't think gcc minds people leaving out the 'typedef' in normal C programs, either. -- George Foot <gfoot AT mc31 DOT merton DOT ox DOT ac DOT uk> Merton College, Oxford.
webmaster | delorie software privacy |
Copyright © 2019 by DJ Delorie | Updated Jul 2019 |