karl@haddock (09/03/86)
BMS-AT!stuart writes: >[re the declaration of reference types "foo(char &c)"] >I don't like this. It violates the nice consistent way that C expressions >work. 'char *c' means that '*c' is of type char. '&c' is not of type >char in any other context. I am also somewhat uneasy about calling it "char &c". The consistent way to declare it would be "char *&c", since you have to write "&c" to get ahold of the "char *" object you are really using. >I would like to see "structure constants" which would allow assignment to >aggregate types. > complex z; > z = { a+1, exp(b) }; > foo( (complex) { a, b } ); The problem, as your last example points out, is that the notation "{...}" doesn't distinguish between different structure types. I suppose the cast notation is workable, but kinda ugly. >Of course any of these could be coded by assigning each member in turn. No, the last example requires assigning each member to a temporary, and then passing that temporary as an argument. Karl W. Z. Heuer (ima!haddock!karl; karl@haddock.isc.com), The Walking Lint