c89

guys, I've this problem: Normally in C99 GCC (cygwin / MinGW / linux), there is dot-notation syntax for initializers in C struct. Like this: //HELP ME HOW TO REWRITE THIS (in most compact way) to MSVC static struct my_member_t my_global_three[] = { {.type = NULL, .name = "one"}, {.type = NULL, .name = "two"}, {.type = NULL, .name = "three"}, }; Having my_memeber_t defined in header file as: struct my_member_t { struct complex_type * type; char * name; int default_number; void * opaque; }; I'm compiling linux code in MSVC 9.0 (Visual Studio 2008), on cygwin/MinGW this works ok. BUT cl is unable

Is there a difference if I compile the following program using c89 vs c99? I get the same output. Is there really a difference between the two? #include <stdio.h> int main () { // Print string to screen. printf ("Hello World\n"); } gcc -o helloworld -std=c99 helloworld.c vs gcc -o helloworld -std=c89 helloworld.c Alok Singhal // comments are not a part of C89 but are OK in C99, falling off of main() without returning any value is equivalent to return 0; in C99, but not so in C89. From N1256 (pdf), 5.1.2.2.3p1: If the return type of the main function is a type compatible with int , a return

Consider following example: #include <stdio.h> int main(void) { unsigned char a = 15; /* one byte */ unsigned short b = 15; /* two bytes */ unsigned int c = 15; /* four bytes */ long x = -a; /* eight bytes */ printf("%ld\n", x); x = -b; printf("%ld\n", x); x = -c; printf("%ld\n", x); return 0; } To compile I am using GCC 4.4.7 (and it gave me no warnings): gcc -g -std=c99 -pedantic-errors -Wall -W check.c My result is: -15 -15 4294967281 The question is why both unsigned char and unsigned short values are "propagated" correctly to (signed) long , while unsigned int is not ? Is there any

I'm learning C from K&R's " The C Programming Language " book. I'm doing the exercises specified in the book. I'm on exercise number 1.16, but I don't understand it. Exercise 1.16: Revise the main routine of the longest-line program so it will correctly print the length of arbitrarily long input lines, and as much as possible of the text. My questions: "...as much as possible of the text..." - is there some limitation on string length? Maybe in standard headers there's a variable with the max allowed value of string length? "...the length of arbitrarily long input lines..." - but in the code

I was wondering what the best way to initialize this struct is with C90, while still keeping it neat. In my header file, call it test.h, I have the following struct defined: struct s_test_cfg{ char *a[3]; char *b[3]; char *c[3]; } Then I have it declared as an extern struct so that I can initialize it globally in the .c file: extern struct s_test_cfg test_cfg; Now in my .c file, I want to be able to declare something like this globally (obviously what I'm about to write is unsupported in C90): struct s_test_cfg test_cfg = { .a = {"a", "b", "c"},\ .b = {"d", "e", "f"},\ .c = {"g", "h", "i"} };

I am especially interested in objects meant to be used from within C, as opposed to implementations of objects that form the core of interpreted languages such as python. I tend to do something like this: struct foo_ops { void (*blah)(struct foo *, ...); void (*plugh)(struct foo *, ...); }; struct foo { struct foo_ops *ops; /* data fields for foo go here */ }; With these structure definitions, the code implementing foo looks something like this: static void plugh(struct foo *, ...) { ... } static void blah(struct foo *, ...) { ... } static struct foo_ops foo_ops = { blah, plugh }; struct foo