Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!yale!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: initializing static mutually referencing structures
Message-ID: <18201:Sep2203:25:3190@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 22 Sep 90 03:25:31 GMT
References: <1287@granjon.UUCP> <186@thor.UUCP>
Distribution: usa
Organization: IR
Lines: 20

In article <186@thor.UUCP> scjones@thor.UUCP (Larry Jones) writes:
> In article <1287@granjon.UUCP>, jhpb@granjon.UUCP (Joseph H. Buehler) writes:
> > I have some structures that refer to each other, that I want to be
> > static.  The compiler doesn't like the following because it doesn't know
> > what y is when it's initializing x:
> > 	static struct xtag x = {&y};
> > 	static struct ytag y = {&x};

A different approach should work under any C compiler, though it may not
be implemented efficiently. It also has the usual syntactic problems of
macros.

  static struct { struct xtag x; struct ytag y; }
    shmoe = { &(shmoe.y), &(shmoe.x) } ;
  #define x (shmoe.x)
  #define y (shmoe.y)

Caveat: This is untested. But the idea is useful to remember.

---Dan