Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: GCC 3.4 Heads-up | From | Andreas Schwab <> | Date | Sat, 27 Dec 2003 17:39:43 +0100 |
| |
linux@horizon.com writes:
> Or consider the case when the structure doesn't have an explicit size > and you have a big case statement for parsing it: > > switch (a->type) { > case BAR: > process_bar_chunk(((struct bar *)a)++); > break; > case BAZ: > process_baz_chunk(((struct baz *)a)++); > break; > ... > }; > > Isn't that code a bit nicer looking? I put the redundant parens
Except that the parens are not redundant.
> in to remind people that I didn't mean to write "(struct bar *)(a++)" > (which also has its legitimate uses).
Which is why it's parsed this way by default.
Andreas.
-- Andreas Schwab, SuSE Labs, schwab@suse.de SuSE Linux AG, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." - 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/
| |