Thread View: comp.std.c
2 messages
2 total messages
Started by Steve Hosgood
Mon, 03 Oct 1988 10:40
Query about typedef type-checking: the answer!
Author: Steve Hosgood
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 1988 10:40
Date: Mon, 03 Oct 1988 10:40
41 lines
2701 bytes
2701 bytes
Many thanks to the following who replied to my query about whether or not you
could expect a warning if you mix 'genuine' types and 'typedef-ed' types
in expressions:
lvc@com.att.cbnews
chris@uucp.mimsy
karl@com.isc.ima.haddock
jagardner@uucp.watmath
henry@uucp.utzoo
bill@uucp.proxftl
am@uk.ac.cam.cl
jpn@com.genrad
The unanimous (sp?) answer was that yes, you can mix a type and a typedef
perfectly freely if the types end up being the same thing, as a typedef merely
creates an alias for a type, and doesn't create a 'new' type as such. Doing this
will not cause any comment from an ANSI compiler, though an individual vendor
would be free to provide a warning message if he wanted to.
This answers my query very fully. My thanks to all those who replied.
The reason I asked was that I recently spent *ages* trying to find a bug in some
code where I use a 'long' to hold a fixed-point 'real' number. To tidy things
up, I used typedef to give me a type called 'fixed_t' that was really a 'long'.
The bug happened when I passed one of these items to a subroutine that wanted
a genuine 'long' as a parameter. The compiler didn't complain, but I ended up
with scrambled results!
What I really need then, is a feature like typedef, but which actually creates
a *new* type, not just an alias. I will not be requesting such a feature! I
know full well that such a 'feature' would need the ability to create functions
that are infix operators for these 'new' types etc, etc. In fact, I seem to
remember that all that got discussed a month or two back in this group.
-----------------------------------------------+------------------------------
Steve Hosgood BSc, | Phone (+44) 792 295213
Image Processing and Systems Engineer, | Fax (+44) 792 295532
Institute for Industrial Information Techology,| Telex 48149
Innovation Centre, University of Wales, +------+ JANET: iiit-sh@uk.ac.swan.pyr
Swansea SA2 8PP | UUCP: ..!ukc!cybaswan.UUCP!iiit-sh
----------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
My views are not necessarily those of my employers!
Re: Query about typedef type-checking: the answer!
Author: Norman Diamond
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1988 00:38
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 1988 00:38
19 lines
1444 bytes
1444 bytes
In article <96@cybaswan.UUCP>, iiit-sh@cybaswan.UUCP (Steve Hosgood) writes: > What I really need then, is a feature like typedef, but which actually creates > a *new* type, not just an alias. If you need it badly enough, put it in a struct. > I will not be requesting such a feature! I > know full well that such a 'feature' would need the ability to create functions > that are infix operators for these 'new' types etc, etc. In fact, I seem to > remember that all that got discussed a month or two back in this group. If you need it badly enough, there are half a dozen other popular programming languages that already do this for you. -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The above opinions are my own. | Norman Diamond If they're also your opinions, | Sony Computer Science Laboratory, Inc. you're infringing my copyright. | diamond%csl.sony.jp@relay.cs.net
Thread Navigation
This is a paginated view of messages in the thread with full content displayed inline.
Messages are displayed in chronological order, with the original post highlighted in green.
Use pagination controls to navigate through all messages in large threads.
Back to All Threads