CodyIT@programming.dev to Linux@lemmy.ml · 18 hours agoThe Linux Kernel Looks To "Bite The Bullet" In Enabling Microsoft C Extensionswww.phoronix.comexternal-linkmessage-square11fedilinkarrow-up147arrow-down19cross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up138arrow-down1external-linkThe Linux Kernel Looks To "Bite The Bullet" In Enabling Microsoft C Extensionswww.phoronix.comCodyIT@programming.dev to Linux@lemmy.ml · 18 hours agomessage-square11fedilinkcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squaremina86@lemmy.wtflinkfedilinkarrow-up8·16 hours agoMinor correction: Unnamed structs and unions (so your second example) are not part of C. They are GNU extensions.
minus-squareObin@feddit.orglinkfedilinkarrow-up3·edit-29 hours agoUnless I’m misunderstanding something, I’m pretty sure they’ve been standardized in C11. Also mentioned here.
minus-squareMinekPo1 [it/she]@lemmygrad.mllinkfedilinkarrow-up3·edit-212 hours ago“ANSI C” by Kernighan and Ritchie disagrees , including that syntax (note : retranslation from Polish as that’s the language my copy is in) : A8.3 […] struct-union-specifier: , union-struct identifier ₒₚₜ { compound-declaration-list } , union-struct identifier […] Specifiers of structures or unions with [a compound declaration] list, but with no label [identifier], creates a unique type; it may only be referred to in the declaration in which it is part.
Minor correction: Unnamed structs and unions (so your second example) are not part of C. They are GNU extensions.
Unless I’m misunderstanding something, I’m pretty sure they’ve been standardized in C11. Also mentioned here.
“ANSI C” by Kernighan and Ritchie disagrees , including that syntax (note : retranslation from Polish as that’s the language my copy is in) :