Article View: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools.mfc
Article #18Re: Newbie pointer question
From: Tim Hollebeek
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 01:21
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 1995 01:21
31 lines
1620 bytes
1620 bytes
In article <Pine.SUN.3.91.950919124849.1948C-100000@achilles>, Brandon Wallace <brandon@criterion.com> wrote: >On Sun, 10 Sep 1995, Vashist Worah wrote: > >-> This may seem trivial to veterans here, but I am trying to figure out >-> what in the world is the difference in declaring pointers in the two >-> different manners illustrated below (VC++ 2.2): >-> >-> 1) double* x >-> 2) double *x >-> > >THERE IS NO FUNCTIONAL DIFFERENCE > >However, some people prefer (1) over (2), some (2) over (1), some don't care. Answer 1: Brandon is absolutely right. Answer 2: You should use 2) because if you use the first, you will probably think that '*' is part of the type, and do something like: double* x, y; // declares a pointer to double and a plain old double at least with the * next to the x, it's a bit more obvious that the * only applies to the x. -- Tim Hollebeek | Everything above is a true statement, for sufficiently PChem Grad Student | false values of true. Princeton Univ. | C++ == OOP-- -------------------| tim@handel.princeton.edu http://wagner.princeton.edu/~tim
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<43nqb8$c2i@cnn.Princeton.EDU>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!cnn.Princeton.EDU!franck!timReferences:
<9a7cb$d1625.8d@news.tcsmgmt.com> <Pine.SUN.3.91.950919124849.1948C-100000@achilles>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!cnn.Princeton.EDU!franck!tim From: tim@franck.Princeton.EDU (Tim Hollebeek) Newsgroups: comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.tools.mfc,comp.os.ms-windows.programmer.win32,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: Newbie pointer question Date: 20 Sep 1995 01:21:44 GMT Organization: Princeton University Message-ID: <43nqb8$c2i@cnn.Princeton.EDU> References: <9a7cb$d1625.8d@news.tcsmgmt.com> <Pine.SUN.3.91.950919124849.1948C-100000@achilles> NNTP-Posting-Host: franck.princeton.edu