declaration

I saw following piece of code in a legacy project. /* token.c */ struct token id_tokens[MAX_TOKENS]; /* analyse.c (v1) */ extern struct token *id_tokens; /* Raised my eyebrow, id_token declares a pointer */ I insisted on changing analyse.c to contain the declaration as below: /* analyse.c (v2) */ extern struct token id_tokens[]; /* I am happy with this. id_tokens declares array of unspecified size. */ I want v2 because pointer to T is not same as array of T . My friend's counter argumented that behaviour of both are same, so it doesn't matter whether I use v1 and v2. Question 1: Does array of

This question already has an answer here: Complex C declaration 7 answers From Introduction to the C++11 feature: trailing return types The article claims template <class T> class tmp { public: int i; }; auto foo()->auto(*)()->tmp<int>(*)(){ return 0; } is equivalent to template <class T> class tmp{ public: int i; }; tmp<int> (*(*foo())())() { return 0; } I don't understand the complex function in the second code example. Where should I look at in the beginning? I guess is foo . But the stat right next to foo is going to define foo as a pointer... Based on the first code example, I will

I'm guessing I would only use UIKIT_EXTERN if there is a chance of C++ code in my project that may use the variable. If this is the case wouldn't it just be safe to declare all your externally available constants with UIKIT_EXTERN? How come I don't see this more? I'm guessing I would only use UIKIT_EXTERN if there is a chance of C++ code in my project that may use the variable. Right. This is the primary reason. This happens because C and C++ symbols use different naming conventions. There is a less common reason: UIKIT_EXTERN also specifies default visibility. Note: More generally, "symbol" -

For example, let's consider the static storage class specifier. Here are a few examples of both valid and ill-formed uses of this storage class specifier: static int a; // valid int static b; // valid static int* c; // valid int static* d; // valid int* static e; // ill-formed static int const* f; // valid int static const* g; // valid int const static* h; // valid int const* static i; // ill-formed typedef int* pointer; static pointer j; // valid pointer static k; // valid (The declarations marked "valid" were accepted by Visual C++ 2012, g++ 4.7.2, and Clang++ 3.1. The declarations marked

In an Eclipse SVN project I have a problem; when I tried to open a declaration of one class, I got this error: Problems opening an editor Reason : projectname does not exist. Also refactoring does not work. I have searched the web and tried all found solutions but nothing helped. I have downloaded different Eclipse and Java versions and switched to a clean workspace but I still have the problem. How can I solve my problem or which solution can I try? Right Click on the project -> Properties -> Project Facets -> Click on the Configuration Link -> Click on Apply Button -> Click on OK button. The

Is there a way to declare a constructor or a destructor in an unnamed class? Consider the following void f() { struct { // some implementation } inst1, inst2; // f implementation - usage of instances } Follow up question : The instances are ofcourse constructed (and destroyed) as any stack based object. What gets called? Is it a mangled name automatically assigned by the compiler? Vlad from Moscow You can not declare a constructor or destructor for an unnamed class because the constructor and destructor names need to match the class name. In your example, the unnamed class is local. It has no

When a local (inner) function is declared in JavaScript, there are two options: Declaring with var keyword, assigning to the variable: (function() { var innerFunction1 = function() { ... }; innerFunction1(); }()); Declaring just with the function keyword, without assigning to variable: (function() { function innerFunction2() { ... }; innerFunction2(); }()); I can see one advantage of the second: the function can be declared below the code which calls it so it is easier to separate private functions from the code actually executed. Which of them is better and why ? Selvakumar Arumugam Actually