Call me a heathen, but I don't like the syntax that C uses for pointers.
char* foo, bar, baz;, being equivalent to char *foo, bar, baz; defines one pointer and two static chars. I would prefer it to define all of the same kind - and if that were the case then I'd go for the first option. I chose the second due to the way C works.
char* foo, bar is the strongest reason to the latter typing method; however heathen that I am I stick to the first one in order to indicate the type and when using char I don't use multiple declarations to be safe.
The logic behind it is that declaration matches use. Arguably declarator syntax could be improved by making the dereferencing operator (for both declararation and use) postfix, so you never needed to worry about precedence in declarators. It'd have to be different from *, of course, but that needn't be a problem. @ might be a reasonable choice.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-07-25 09:18 am (UTC)char* foo, bar, baz;, being equivalent to char *foo, bar, baz; defines one pointer and two static chars. I would prefer it to define all of the same kind - and if that were the case then I'd go for the first option. I chose the second due to the way C works.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-25 09:51 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-25 05:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-25 05:56 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-25 04:25 pm (UTC)Indeed; C pointer syntax is not sensible.
no subject
Date: 2006-07-31 01:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-07-31 02:16 pm (UTC)