Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!olivea!uunet!abvax!iccgcc!browns
From: browns@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com (Stan Brown)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Is typedef char BUFFER[20] legal?
Message-ID: <3079.27ad5c52@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com>
Date: 4 Feb 91 18:06:26 GMT
References: <1212@tredysvr.Tredydev.Unisys.COM> <1991Jan29.210100.8105@zoo.toronto.edu> <22642@netcom.UUCP>
Lines: 21

In article <22642@netcom.UUCP>, avery@netcom.UUCP (Avery Colter) writes:
> My instinct right now is telling me that 
> 
> typedef char[20] BUFFER
> 
> is more consistent...
> 
> But I'll take the word of the more experienced that the first def
> can be done too.

    typedef char BUFFER[20];
is legal C.  I believe that what you wrote is not legal C.

The general rule for writing typedefs is: write a normal variable
declaration, stick 'typedef' on the front, and the variable name becomes
the type name.  Thus BUFFER is the name of a type that is array (20
long) of char.

Hey--this is all my opinion, nobody else's. Rely on it at your peril.
                                   email: browns@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Cleveland, Ohio, USA    +1 216 371 0043