[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Temporary variables still checked out
- Subject: Re: Temporary variables still checked out
- From: steinhh(at)ulrik.uio.no (Stein Vidar Hagfors Haugan)
- Date: 27 May 1999 12:47:29 GMT
- In-reply-to: Peter Mason's message of Wed, 26 May 1999 23:56:29 GMT
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.idl-pvwave
- Organization: University of Oslo, Norway
- References: <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Xref: news.doit.wisc.edu comp.lang.idl-pvwave:14935
Peter Mason wrote:
> > ((*(info.ptr)).optIndex)[i,*] = 0
> => Instead of this, try (*info.ptr).optIndex[i,*]=0; etc.
> Things DO get a bit unsettling when (structures of) pointers to
> structures are involved, but a bit of command line action will
> normally clarify IDL's workings with brackets soon enough. (Basically,
> you must restrict your bracketing to just the pointer component(s).)
Which reminds me that I should have registered my wish for
a pointer-to-structure-dereference operator (like C) with
RSI.... What link was that..?
Wouldn't it be great to be able to say just
instead of all that gibberish..... And as for the "name" of
the operator, there shouldn't be any real problem in using
"->" even though it's also used for objects, but if they want
to avoid the extra checking, they could go for "-->" like
above instead.... or something else.
What *really* bugs me is why on earth they didn't provide
an operator like this in the first place when they introduced
pointers..... But by all means, don't get me wrong, pointers
and objects are the best things to happen to IDL since....
well, ... since ... hmm, since I discovered the Emacs
editing/shell mode for IDL!