Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 8 Nov 2005 17:36:58 -0600 | Subject | Re: typedefs and structs | From | linas <> |
| |
On Tue, Nov 08, 2005 at 12:18:42PM +1100, Neil Brown was heard to remark: > > Another reason for not using typedefs is that if you do, and you want > to refer to the structure in some other include file, you have to > #include the include file that devices the structure. > If you don't use typedefs, you can just say: > > struct foo; > > and the compiler will happily wait for the complete definition later > (providing it doesn't need the size in the meanwhile).
Yes, this is the "forward declaration" problem I was refering to. Its unavoidable if structs have circular references to each other.
However, I've learned, by experience, several things by trying to eliminate such forward declarations (and the related #include hell):
-- Its really, really hard, and right in the middle, you think, "gosh this is a stupid idea, why am I bothering?"
-- When you get done, you think: "wow this new code structure is so insanely better than the old code! The guy who wrote the old code should be hung from a yardarm as an example!"
So having a mechanism that prevents coders from declaring "struct foo" whenever they feel like it can be a good thing. Of course, your milage may vary.
--linas - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |