Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!mcdchg!laidbak!tellab5!mtcchi!fjo
From: fjo@mtcchi.uucp (2667-Frank Owen(ZG90210)0000)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: THINK C Suggestions
Message-ID: <1990Oct11.221423.19815@mtcchi.uucp>
Date: 11 Oct 90 22:14:23 GMT
References: <1990Oct9.171921.29529@mtcchi.uucp> <1990Oct10.054054.25762@d.cs.okstate.edu>
Organization: Memorex Telex Corporation NSBG/STP
Lines: 51

minich@d.cs.okstate.edu (Robert Minich) writes:

>Your argument (except for supporting a standard) is completely bunk. If
>nothing is so hard about

>	(*p)->x

>then why not

>	(*p).x   instead of p->x

>??? What's so hard about THIS? Personally, I tend to end up with a ton a
>parenthesis and adding a couple more often makes it harder to understand
>but that's C for you. Make's me want to go back to Pascal at times (no
>often, though)

>	(*object_ptr)->object_field
>	(*((Handle *)(&(myPtr))))->field

>is equivalent to

>	object_ptr^^.object_field
>	Handle(@myPtr)^^field

>Of course the second part is rather dumb.
Yes, it is.


Using your examples, the "improved" syntax would yield:

	object_ptr->>object_field
	((Handle *)(&(myPtr)))->>field
	
I don't find this THAT much better.

>Now add a couple more typecasts in there and try your luck at figuring
>out you forgot a dereference and the C compiler didn't mind a bit. :-)

  Actually, the C compiler usually DOES mind if you forget a dereference.
If you say (object_ptr)->object_field, you will get a compile error, as
object_field is not a member of what object_ptr points to.

O.K. I'll admit that sometimes it's a bit more difficult in C,
but unless there is a language feature missing (like those added
with C++), I think it's a bit late to be changing the language.

-- 
	Frank Owen (fjo@mtcchi.uucp)  708-305-3182
	Memorex-Telex Corporation   Indian Hill Court 
	1000 E. Warrenville Rd.  RM 1A315
	Naperville, Il 60563