Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.6.2.17 $; site ea.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxj!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!ea!mwm
From: mwm@ea.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.lang.c
Subject: Re: Must a NULL pointer be a 0 bit patte
Message-ID: <5700025@ea.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 28-Oct-84 01:15:00 EST
Article-I.D.: ea.5700025
Posted: Sun Oct 28 01:15:00 1984
Date-Received: Thu, 1-Nov-84 03:37:57 EST
References: <529@wjh12.UUCP>
Lines: 41
Nf-ID: #R:wjh12:-52900:ea:5700025:000:1284
Nf-From: ea!mwm    Oct 27 19:15:00 1984

/***** ea:net.lang.c / utzoo!henry / 11:22 am  Oct 23, 1984 */
As I understand it, nobody is claiming that the "first element" rule is
good; all they are claiming is that it's simple and does not have adverse
consequences elsewhere.  Apparently the various alternatives all have
serious problems of one kind or another.
-- 
				Henry Spencer @ U of Toronto Zoology
				{allegra,ihnp4,linus,decvax}!utzoo!henry
/* ---------- */

Was one of the alternatives something similar to the ALGOLW "record constant"
facility? In C, this would translate to:

	(struct gezornin) {"a", 10, 2.3, 'x'}

being considered a constant. Thus, you can do union initialization as so:

	struct gort {
		int	type ;
		union	info {
				struct	gfloat	{ float	gfx, gfy } ;
				struct	gint	{ long	gix, giy } ;
				string	*name ;
				} ;
		} sample[] = {
			{T_FLOAT, (struct glfoat) { 3.4, 5.7 } } ,
			{T_INT, (struct gint) { 243, 56 } } ,
			{T_STRING, (char *) "this is a test" }
			} ;

In other words, add a facility to allow structure constants (useful in *lots*
of places), and then require all union initializations to have an explicit
cast.

The union initializations won't break any existing code (nobody has them
now, right? :-), and the "struct constants" shouldn't break any code.

Comments?

	<mike