Related articles |
---|
Infinite look ahead required by C++? ng2010@att.invalid (ng2010) (2010-02-05) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2010-02-06) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? idbaxter@semdesigns.com (Ira Baxter) (2010-02-06) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? thurston@complang.org (Adrian Thurston) (2010-02-08) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2010-02-09) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2010-02-10) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2010-02-10) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? cfc@shell01.TheWorld.com (Chris F Clark) (2010-02-10) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? martin@gkc.org.uk (Martin Ward) (2010-02-11) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? idbaxter@semdesigns.com (Ira Baxter) (2010-02-13) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk (Stephen Horne) (2010-02-14) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? wclodius@los-alamos.net (2010-02-13) |
Re: Infinite look ahead required by C++? krzikalla@gmx.de (Olaf Krzikalla) (2010-02-19) |
[4 later articles] |
From: | Stephen Horne <sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk> |
Newsgroups: | comp.compilers |
Date: | Wed, 10 Feb 2010 18:07:04 +0000 |
Organization: | virginmedia.com |
References: | 10-02-024 10-02-039 10-02-043 |
Keywords: | parse, C++ |
Posted-Date: | 10 Feb 2010 15:53:25 EST |
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 17:02:18 +0000 (UTC), glen herrmannsfeldt
<gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
>Stephen Horne <sh006d3592@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>(snip)
>> C used to require that you write something like...
>
>> struct mystruct x;
>
>I would say that C still does. It is typedef that causes the problem
>that you mention, and typedef is commonly used with structure
>declarations. You can typedef int just as easily as struct.
OK - it's been over a decade since I last used C. C++ doesn't require
the "typedef", so you get the issue either way.
Return to the
comp.compilers page.
Search the
comp.compilers archives again.