> int* p
I very much prefer that syntax, because the '*' is part of the type, not part of the variable name.
> You might never declare more that a single variable in a statement
int a, *b, c, *d;
Yes, you can do that, and in fact if you want to declare multiple pointers on the same line, you are
required to put a '*' in front of every pointer variable name.
Personally, I've always considered this to be a defect of the language. Would it really be so awful to have to write instead:
// Both are of type 'int'. Pretty straightforward.
int a, c;
// In my fantasy world, both of these would be of type 'pointer to int',
// but IRL b is a pointer and d is an int. fun!
int* b, d;
But of course that's not the language we have.
I'd be very curious to know the motivation for requiring a '*' in front of each pointer variable name, as opposed to once with the type. So far the only ones I've thought of (not mutually exclusive) are:
a) we REALLY love terseness, and
b) ooh look at this clever hack I came up with for variable declaration syntax.
I very much prefer that syntax, because the '*' is part of the type, not part of the variable name.
> You might never declare more that a single variable in a statement
Yes, you can do that, and in fact if you want to declare multiple pointers on the same line, you are required to put a '*' in front of every pointer variable name.Personally, I've always considered this to be a defect of the language. Would it really be so awful to have to write instead:
But of course that's not the language we have.I'd be very curious to know the motivation for requiring a '*' in front of each pointer variable name, as opposed to once with the type. So far the only ones I've thought of (not mutually exclusive) are:
a) we REALLY love terseness, and
b) ooh look at this clever hack I came up with for variable declaration syntax.