Yeah, int *num;
is customary in C, but for some reason C++ people like to write int* num; I am sure I saw some rationale for that in gcc's C++ part, but I can't find it anymore. Apparently C programmers do not fall for that. Boris. On Sun, 30 Dec 2001, Dan Sugalski wrote: > At 09:29 PM 12/29/2001 -0800, Boris Tschirschwitz wrote: > >Hi. > > > >Since there is a code police now: > >I am sure that no one in his or her right mind would ever want something > >like > > opcode_t * code_start > > > >in beautified code. > > > >Of course, it's not a multiplication--we all know that--but when just > >skimming over the code it sure distracts towards this direction. > >I suggest > > opcode_t* code_start > > Almost. The * should be in front of the variable: > > opcode_t *code_start; > > since it's really part of the variable not the type. > > Dan > > --------------------------------------"it's like this"------------------- > Dan Sugalski even samurai > [EMAIL PROTECTED] have teddy bears and even > teddy bears get drunk > >
