Spaces, stars, and pointers
-
Personally, I believe this: char* data; is superior to this: char *data; Because char*, or variable*, more easily identifies the fact you are declaring a pointer. Likewise, char *data="hello"; is inferior to char* data = "hello"; Because the spaces more clearly identify that information you're assigning to the variable. Obviously, this is personal taste and cannot be objectively true, so what do all of you believe?
so what do all of you believe? That you are wrong. :)
char* data, data2;
The format implies that both data and data2 are pointers which is totally wrong.
char *data, data2;
This format implies that data is a pointer while data2 isn't. Of course, this assumes that you define multiple variables per line. Which isn't really a good idea given the ambiguity of the two previous statements. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
Personally, I believe this: char* data; is superior to this: char *data; Because char*, or variable*, more easily identifies the fact you are declaring a pointer. Likewise, char *data="hello"; is inferior to char* data = "hello"; Because the spaces more clearly identify that information you're assigning to the variable. Obviously, this is personal taste and cannot be objectively true, so what do all of you believe?
char* pch; is the only way to go. I only violate that when I do something like: char *pch, chNext; but I rarely do that anyway. --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
-
so what do all of you believe? That you are wrong. :)
char* data, data2;
The format implies that both data and data2 are pointers which is totally wrong.
char *data, data2;
This format implies that data is a pointer while data2 isn't. Of course, this assumes that you define multiple variables per line. Which isn't really a good idea given the ambiguity of the two previous statements. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
Both good points. I didn't look at it that way because as a rule I won't define multiple variable per line unless there are a lot of them.
-
Personally, I believe this: char* data; is superior to this: char *data; Because char*, or variable*, more easily identifies the fact you are declaring a pointer. Likewise, char *data="hello"; is inferior to char* data = "hello"; Because the spaces more clearly identify that information you're assigning to the variable. Obviously, this is personal taste and cannot be objectively true, so what do all of you believe?
I use both carelessly. Not sure which one is better. But I like char *p better than char* p. Donno why. Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
-
so what do all of you believe? That you are wrong. :)
char* data, data2;
The format implies that both data and data2 are pointers which is totally wrong.
char *data, data2;
This format implies that data is a pointer while data2 isn't. Of course, this assumes that you define multiple variables per line. Which isn't really a good idea given the ambiguity of the two previous statements. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
Tim Smith wrote: char* data, data2; If you write that expecting data2 to be a char*,then you don't understand the syntax. Putting the * next to the type is still clearer. ;) ;P --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
-
so what do all of you believe? That you are wrong. :)
char* data, data2;
The format implies that both data and data2 are pointers which is totally wrong.
char *data, data2;
This format implies that data is a pointer while data2 isn't. Of course, this assumes that you define multiple variables per line. Which isn't really a good idea given the ambiguity of the two previous statements. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
Very good point Tim. Maybe thats why I liked the other one subconciously :-) Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
-
Tim Smith wrote: char* data, data2; If you write that expecting data2 to be a char*,then you don't understand the syntax. Putting the * next to the type is still clearer. ;) ;P --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
You know what could be really dangerous? say someone does this. LPTSTR y1,y2; y1 is now a char * and y2 is a char. But without the '*' things can be vague,,, Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
-
Personally, I believe this: char* data; is superior to this: char *data; Because char*, or variable*, more easily identifies the fact you are declaring a pointer. Likewise, char *data="hello"; is inferior to char* data = "hello"; Because the spaces more clearly identify that information you're assigning to the variable. Obviously, this is personal taste and cannot be objectively true, so what do all of you believe?
-
You know what could be really dangerous? say someone does this. LPTSTR y1,y2; y1 is now a char * and y2 is a char. But without the '*' things can be vague,,, Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: LPTSTR y1,y2; y1 is now a char * and y2 is a char. bzzzt, wrong. Sorry, you don't get to go on to Final Jeopardy. y1 and y2 are both LPTSTR :) --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
-
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: LPTSTR y1,y2; y1 is now a char * and y2 is a char. bzzzt, wrong. Sorry, you don't get to go on to Final Jeopardy. y1 and y2 are both LPTSTR :) --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
how come Mike? I am puzzled I checked through the chain of typedefs and finally decided that an LPTSTR is a char* and nothin else but a char* oh!!!!! you mean the "typedef" does the trick eh???? gosh!!!! My C basics is bad :-( Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
-
how come Mike? I am puzzled I checked through the chain of typedefs and finally decided that an LPTSTR is a char* and nothin else but a char* oh!!!!! you mean the "typedef" does the trick eh???? gosh!!!! My C basics is bad :-( Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: you mean the "typedef" does the trick eh???? Yep :) "LPTSTR" becomes a type name, just like "int" or any other built-in type. --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
-
Nish [BusterBoy] wrote: you mean the "typedef" does the trick eh???? Yep :) "LPTSTR" becomes a type name, just like "int" or any other built-in type. --Mike-- My really out-of-date homepage "Why does anyone have a web page? Too much free time... not enough friends... justifying owning a computer." -- Noel Crane on Felicity Sonork - 100.10414 AcidHelm Big fan of Alyson Hannigan.
Thanks Mike. I think I can use this as an interview question next time we recruit :-) Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
-
so what do all of you believe? That you are wrong. :)
char* data, data2;
The format implies that both data and data2 are pointers which is totally wrong.
char *data, data2;
This format implies that data is a pointer while data2 isn't. Of course, this assumes that you define multiple variables per line. Which isn't really a good idea given the ambiguity of the two previous statements. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
-
You know what could be really dangerous? say someone does this. LPTSTR y1,y2; y1 is now a char * and y2 is a char. But without the '*' things can be vague,,, Nish Sonork ID 100.9786 voidmain www.busterboy.org If you don't find me on CP, I'll be at Bob's HungOut
:eek: Don‘t do that! Your post startled me. I have on occasion declared LPTSTR y1, y2; After reading your post I started remembering all the code I used like this so I could fix it before it crashed. X| I now truly understand the purpose of typedef. :-O
-
Personally, I believe this: char* data; is superior to this: char *data; Because char*, or variable*, more easily identifies the fact you are declaring a pointer. Likewise, char *data="hello"; is inferior to char* data = "hello"; Because the spaces more clearly identify that information you're assigning to the variable. Obviously, this is personal taste and cannot be objectively true, so what do all of you believe?
I agree with you. If there was area for confusion like Tim mentioned above, I would simply declare the variable on a new line. ________________ David Wulff http://www.davidwulff.co.uk "I loathe people who keep dogs. They are cowards who haven't got the guts to bite people themselves" - August Strindberg
-
so what do all of you believe? That you are wrong. :)
char* data, data2;
The format implies that both data and data2 are pointers which is totally wrong.
char *data, data2;
This format implies that data is a pointer while data2 isn't. Of course, this assumes that you define multiple variables per line. Which isn't really a good idea given the ambiguity of the two previous statements. Tim Smith Descartes Systems Sciences, Inc.
I totally agree with you :-) - Anders Money talks, but all mine ever says is "Goodbye!"
-
Personally, I believe this: char* data; is superior to this: char *data; Because char*, or variable*, more easily identifies the fact you are declaring a pointer. Likewise, char *data="hello"; is inferior to char* data = "hello"; Because the spaces more clearly identify that information you're assigning to the variable. Obviously, this is personal taste and cannot be objectively true, so what do all of you believe?
I tend to go for char * data; which clearly shows that the * is a seperate entity which modifys the meaning of the former, and aids in defining the latter. Even if I could, I would not say staticconstchar data, so why would I not also space out the * ? The fact that multiple variables on the one line each need the *, if they are pointers, is another reason I would not space them as you have. However, while I can smell a poll coming on ( and if you're reading Chris, I'd prefer a poll on if people use STL and why/why not), it is, as you say, ultimately a matter of choice. Christian After all, there's nothing wrong with an elite as long as I'm allowed to be part of it!! - Mike Burston Oct 23, 2001
Sonork ID 100.10002:MeanManOz
I live in Bob's HungOut now