更多结构 [英] More structs
问题描述
快速提问。
在下面的代码中，省略单词word，如char * word，
会产生语法错误。
在类似的非结构中声明，表达式char *应该
就够了。 （ 我认为）。是否需要添加此功能？
这个独特的结构。
像往常一样感谢。
struct key {
char * word;
int count;
};
int main（int argc，const char * argv []）{
struct key keytab [] = {
" auto"，0
};
}
Quick question.
In the code below, omitting the word "word", as in char *word,
produces an error of syntax.
In similar "non-struct" declarations, the expression "char *" should
suffice. ( I think). Is there a reason that one needs to add this? Is
this unique to structs.
Thanks as usual.
struct key {
char *word;
int count;
};
int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) {
struct key keytab[] = {
"auto", 0
};
}
推荐答案
mdh写道：
mdh wrote:
快速提问。
在下面的代码中，省略单词word，如char * word，
会产生语法错误。
在类似的非结构中声明，表达式char *应该
就够了。 （ 我认为）。是否需要添加此功能？是
这个结构独特。
像往常一样感谢。
struct key {
char * word;
int count;
};
int main（int argc，const char * argv []）{
struct key keytab [] = {
" auto"，0
};
}
Quick question.
In the code below, omitting the word "word", as in char *word,
produces an error of syntax.
In similar "non-struct" declarations, the expression "char *" should
suffice. ( I think). Is there a reason that one needs to add this? Is
this unique to structs.
Thanks as usual.
struct key {
char *word;
int count;
};
int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) {
struct key keytab[] = {
"auto", 0
};
}
如果word被省略了，你怎么会利用它命名的
指针？让我们省略一些标识符：
struct {
char *;
int;
};
int（int，const char * []）{
struct [] = {
" auto"， 0
};
}
这个（无效的）源代码有什么意义？它是
声明（类型）一个类型，一个函数，两个参数，以及一个数组变量，但都是无法使用的。
你的短语类似的``非结构'''''声明"我发现
莫名其妙。什么是相似的声明你指的是什么？
-
Eric Sosman
es ***** @ ieee-dot-org.inva lid
If "word" were omitted, how would you make use of the
pointer that it names? Let''s omit a few more identifiers:
struct {
char*;
int;
};
int (int, const char*[]) {
struct [] = {
"auto", 0
};
}
What sense can be made of this (invalid) source code? It
declares (sort of) a type, a function, two parameters, and
an array variable, but all are unusable.
Your phrase "similar ``non-struct'''' declarations" I find
baffling. What "similar" declarations do you refer to?
--
Eric Sosman
es*****@ieee-dot-org.invalid
mdh< md ** @ comcast。 netwrote：
mdh <md**@comcast.netwrote:
快速提问。
在下面的代码中，省略单词word，如char * word，
产生语法错误。
Quick question.
In the code below, omitting the word "word", as in char *word,
produces an error of syntax.
在类似的非结构中声明，表达式char *应该
就够了。 （ 我认为）。
In similar "non-struct" declarations, the expression "char *" should
suffice. ( I think).
你对''非结构'是什么意思？声明？一行
只需
char *;
总是语法错误，也在结构声明之外。
What do you mean with ''"non-struct" declarations''? A line with
just
char *;
is always a syntax error, also outside a structure declaration.
是否有人需要添加此内容？
结构是独一无二的。
Is there a reason that one needs to add this? Is
this unique to structs.
如果
没有名字，你会如何访问结构中的''word''成员？只写（只有在initia-
lization期间）结构的成员几乎没有多大意义......
How would you access the ''word'' member of the structure if it
wouldn''t have a name? Write-only (and that only during initia-
lization) members of a structure hardly make much sense...
struct key {
char * word;
int count;
};
struct key {
char *word;
int count;
};
int main（int argc，const char * argv []）{
int main (int argc, const char * argv[]) {
struct key keytab [] = {
" auto"，0
};
}
struct key keytab[] = {
"auto", 0
};
}
问候，Jens
-
\ Jens Thoms Toerring ___ jt@toerring.de
\ __________________________ http：// toerring .de
8月23日12：10 * pm，Eric Sosman< esos ... @ ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote：
On Aug 23, 12:10*pm, Eric Sosman <esos...@ieee-dot-org.invalidwrote:
mdh写道：
mdh wrote:
快速提问。
Quick question.
* * *如果word被省略了，你怎么会利用它命名的
指针？ *让我们省略一些标识符：
* * * * struct {
* * * * * * char *;
* * * * * * int;
* * * *};
* * * * int（int，const char * []）{
* * * * * * struct [] = {
* * * * * * * *" auto"，0
* * * * * *};
* * * *}
这个（无效的）源代码有什么意义？ *它
声明（类型）一个类型，一个函数，两个参数，并且
一个数组变量，但都是无法使用的。
* * *你的短语类似的``非结构''''声明我发现
莫名其妙。 *什么是类似的声明你指的是什么？
* * *If "word" were omitted, how would you make use of the
pointer that it names? *Let''s omit a few more identifiers:
* * * * struct {
* * * * * * char*;
* * * * * * int;
* * * * };
* * * * int (int, const char*[]) {
* * * * * * struct [] = {
* * * * * * * * "auto", 0
* * * * * * };
* * * * }
What sense can be made of this (invalid) source code? *It
declares (sort of) a type, a function, two parameters, and
an array variable, but all are unusable.
* * *Your phrase "similar ``non-struct'''' declarations" I find
baffling. *What "similar" declarations do you refer to?
冒着进一步嘲笑的风险，我认为**这是一个有效的
比较。
void foo（int a，char c）{
int b;
char c;
b = a;
等
}
现在声明，如果我是没错，可能是
void foo（int，char）;
显然，这是不同的，但现在确定原因。
At the risk of further ridicule, I **thought** this a valid
comparison.
void foo ( int a, char c){
int b;
char c;
b = a;
etc
}
Now the declaration, if I am not mistaken, could be
void foo ( int, char);
Clearly, this is different, but now sure why.
>
>
这篇关于更多结构的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！
