Samuel
@samuel.fm
although in my defence I was fighting with syntax most of the time. I'm gonna try again tomorrow
3 3David BuchananIt's a shame they had to overload * and &, most of the syntax would be saner without that I think - that and the weird "spiral parse" thing going on with type declarations
1 4David Buchanan
David BuchananI think I heard someone say the spiral rule doesn't even work in all circumstances, lol
1 3
Edwin KoflerOMG shut up!!! 😭 😭 😭 please tell me you're joking
1
shreyan (wise)definitely the one most confusing thing in C
1 2shreyan (wise)if onlty they hadn't gone with the weird rule that the type name should be in the position so that after unpacking all the outer syntax of the *'s and []'s and ()'s you'd end up at the final type
1 1shreyan (wise)i can't even explain it in words properly lol, it's conceptually simple but just confusing in practice
1
The Big MeowskiNow we want the pointer to the array to be const but not the array itself. 🤯
2 2
James Felix BlackIt’s so hateful
2David BuchananHonestly if your type declarations are looking like that, it's time to stop
1 2The Big MeowskiI think sometimes you can't even do it without a typedef, or it's really hard to at least.
1 1David BuchananThis site often comes in handy cdecl.org
cc @mozzius.dev in case this thread is too long to notify
1 4
David BuchananI have a weird approach to C since most of the C I've read has been decompiler output
1 3
New Years Revolution ✊Syntax is a bear, but pointers will, as Joe Pesci says, “fuck you at the drive thru”
1