[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
Re: Dynamic loading progress
From:
Daniel Colascione
Subject:
Re: Dynamic loading progress
Date:
2015年9月13日 07:15:03 -0700
User-agent:
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
On 09/13/2015 06:04 AM, Philipp Stephani wrote:
> Daniel Colascione <address@hidden <mailto:address@hidden>> schrieb
> am So., 15. Feb. 2015 um 21:21 Uhr:
>
> typedef struct emacs_value_tag* emacs_value;
>
>
> Would it make sense to not use a typedef here? Using a typedef means
> that the type including its size is opaque and subject to change, which
> can break ABI compatibility. I'd rather have something like:
>
> struct emacs_value {
> // contains private fields
> };
>
> and then pass /struct emacs_value*/ around.
You may have missed the "*" in the typedef. The difference is stylistic.
There's no difference between foo and bar here.
typedef struct valuex* value;
void foo(struct valuex* x);
void bar(value y);
I find the typedef much more readable, however.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
- Re: Dynamic loading progress, (continued)
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Philipp Stephani, 2015年09月29日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Stephen J. Turnbull, 2015年09月13日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Daniel Colascione, 2015年09月13日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Stefan Monnier, 2015年09月14日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Philipp Stephani, 2015年09月29日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Stephen J. Turnbull, 2015年09月14日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Stephen Leake, 2015年09月14日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Stephen J. Turnbull, 2015年09月14日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress , Philipp Stephani, 2015年09月29日
Re: Dynamic loading progress , Philipp Stephani, 2015年09月13日
- Re: Dynamic loading progress,
Daniel Colascione <=