4 ms·
it's actually not anonymous structs but unnamed structs, which are a different thing in the standard (and present in both C and C++). Anonymous: struct Fo
by jcelerier 5y ago
it's actually not anonymous structs but unnamed structs, which are a different thing in the standard (and present in both C and C++).
Anonymous:
struct Foo {
struct { int x, y; };
};
Foo foo; do_stuff_with(foo.x);
Unnamed:
struct Foo {
struct { int x, y; } child;
};
Foo foo; do_stuff_with(foo.child.x);
- hoseja 5y agoThose two words mean the same yet are different terms. Thanks for a correction.
- jcelerier 5y agomy approach to technical terms is that life is much simpler if you entirely forget their real-world usage and just map them strictly to how they are defined in the technical context... they could be called zroglub and blox that I couldn't care less, and honestly sometimes I feel that it would be much less confusing to do things that way rather than trying to tie things to some common dictionary word
- adamrezich 5y agocareful—that's how you get hoon/nock
- jcelerier 5y agoWhat about it ? I'm certainly missing a reference because this evokes nothing to me