Re: why use -> (not .) with pointers?
- From: anon7843@xxxxxxxxxxx (Anonymous 7843)
- Date: Thu, 30 Jun 2005 18:15:12 GMT
In article <20050630150438.69d675d3.f.kater2@xxxxxxx>,
Felix Kater <f.kater2@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>when accessing the variables in a struct: What's the reason why in C
>you have -> and . instead of only . ?
I think it's at least partially historical. Most other languages of
the time (mid seventies) were making the distinction between pointing
and membership, perhaps less for utilitarian reasons and more because
there was a perception (at the time) that pointers were a difficult
concept for computer science students to grasp. Having a distinct
syntax (one which actually has a "pointy" symbol) may have been helpful
in that area.
--
7842++
.
- References:
- why use -> (not .) with pointers?
- From: Felix Kater
- why use -> (not .) with pointers?
- Prev by Date: Re: why use -> (not .) with pointers?
- Next by Date: Re: How to make binary data portable?
- Previous by thread: Re: why use -> (not .) with pointers?
- Next by thread: How to make binary data portable?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
