From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Mon May 25 07:48:43 2009 X-SourceIP: 77.249.75.204 Message-ID: <4A1A79C0.20600@chello.nl> Date: Mon, 25 May 2009 12:58:08 +0200 From: Henk Robbers User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (Macintosh/20050317) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "[MiNT] Mailing-List" Subject: Re: [MiNT] anonymous structs and C99 References: <4A19BBD3.8060409@freesbee.fr> <4A19CAC1.20206@chello.nl> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: h.robbers@chello.nl Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: Miro Kropacek wrote: In my opinion is nicer to write p->x > than p->u.x, especially when the 'u' has no real meaning. Already 'u.' avoided typing numerous annoying casts. :-) Besides, u need not be meaningles. The name of a struct adds meaning to the names of its members. -- Groeten; Regards. Henk Robbers. http://members.chello.nl/h.robbers Interactive disassembler: TT-Digger; http://digger.atari.org A Home Cooked C compiler: AHCC; http://ahcc.atari.org