portability of simple struct vs. array?
Brian Donahue
bridon at attc.UUCP
Sat Feb 16 05:17:45 AEST 1991
In article <1058 at attc.UUCP> i wrote:
>Stupid question. (maybe should go into FAQ?)
>i have a function that's declared as:
>
>foo( arg )
>double arg[3];
>{
>...
>and, outside of this function i have a struct like:
>typedef struct {
> double xyz[3];
> } point;
>Q1: can i call foo() with a pointer to a point struct?
Yeah. a follow-up to my own question (good, huh?)
I over-simplified the original question and people replied
why dont you just call foo with p.xyz ?? Yeah, i hear ya.
Actually, the situation is more like: foo is declared as:
foo( arg )
double arg[6][3];
{
...
and i have an array of structs of:
typedef struct {
double xyz[3];
double tangent[3];
} point_tan;
Rephrasing my questions:
Q1: can i call foo() with a pointer to a point_tan struct?
eg. foo( &pttan[i] )
Q2: can i do so portably? or am i making too much of an assumption
by assuming contiguous, non-padded structures?
Q3: Is there some documentation in K&R that supports your answer?
Because of the stupidity of this question, plz reply via email
to:
bridon at auto-trol.COM
thanks again!
More information about the Comp.lang.c
mailing list