Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site umcp-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!akgua!mcnc!decvax!harpo!ihnp4!houxm!hogpc!houti!ariel!vax135!floyd!cmcl2!seismo!rlgvax!cvl!umcp-cs!chris
From: chris@umcp-cs.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: adjectives for typedef'd names
Message-ID: <7013@umcp-cs.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 11-May-84 21:22:59 EDT
Article-I.D.: umcp-cs.7013
Posted: Fri May 11 21:22:59 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 13-May-84 10:03:31 EDT
References: <1204@proper.UUCP>
Organization: Univ. of Maryland, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 26
Keywords: typedef grammar LR(1)

PCC happens to treat ``typedef''ed names exactly the same as the
thing to which they are typed.  (At least, if you say

	typedef int foo;

	main () {
		register unsigned foo i;
		short foo;
		...
	}

you get one ``register unsigned int'' and no ``short int''s.)  I
prefer this, because this is the way I think of them.  In fact I
used to get the order of ``typedef'' backwards, because I thought
of them as ``glorified #define's''.  (The one advantage they have
over #define's is that they can make things syntactically simpler,
e.g.,

	typedef int (*pfun)();	/* pointer to function returning int */
	pfun table[] = { ... };	/* a table of pointers to functions */

.)
-- 
In-Real-Life: Chris Torek, Univ of MD Comp Sci (301) 454-7690
UUCP:	{seismo,allegra,brl-bmd}!umcp-cs!chris
CSNet:	chris@umcp-cs		ARPA:	chris@maryland