Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/05/25/13:23:25
In article <35697D38 DOT DD633DB AT imailbox DOT com> you wrote:
[...]
> typedef struct TAD {
> int code;
> struct TAD *next; // note the *
> struct TAD *prior; // noter the *
> } Tad;
> Tad myTad;
This one's fine, (even though I'd personally use 'Tad' for the struct
tag as well), ...
> Or, more simply:
> struct Tad {
> int code;
> Tad *next;
> Tad *prior;
> };
> Tad MyTad;
but this one *isn't*. At least not if it's C (not C++) we're talking
about. They *are* different languages, after all (although some
people tend to forget that, from time to time).
--
Hans-Bernhard Broeker (broeker AT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de)
Even if all the snow were burnt, ashes would remain.
- Raw text -