🚀 go-pugleaf

diamond@tkou02.enet.dec.com ("diamond@tkovoa") writes:

> [...] The Extended Pascal Standard does have a "type of" construct,
> approved in 1987, which solves exactly this problem. In C-based
> languages, there is a syntactic difficulty because the function's
> return type is specified before the parameter types. The processor has
> to analyze the parameters first. Here in pseudo-C syntax:

>  typeof(x) *bsearch(const any (*x)[], const typeof(x) *,
>                     unsigned, unsigned,
>                     int(*)(const typeof(x) *, const typeof(x) *));

> Notice that the first parameter names the prototype-scoped identifier
> x, whose type is invoked in other parts of this prototype. If the
> programmer wanted to name other parameters and copy their types as
> well, it could also be done.

I know that the urge to preserve C's write-only, unparsable syntax
forever into the future is nearly insurmountable, but that is really
ugly and hard to read. How about:

 typeof(x) *bsearch(const any (*x)[], const oftype(x) *,
                    unsigned, unsigned,
                    int(*)(const oftype(x) *, const oftype(x) *));

Also, looking at it, I would assume that "x" is of type "pointer to
function", and so question the "*"s within the prototype of bsearch;
i.e., it is hard to understand to what, and with what stopping point,
your typing has tied x.

Kent, the man from xanth.
<xanthian@Zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <xanthian@well.sf.ca.us>
--
But then, I was _born_ confused.