On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 7:14 AM, David Brownell <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tuesday 19 May 2009, Dean Glazeski wrote: >> >> changed all 'struct target_s' to 'target_t' to keep things consistent. > > I'd rather do away with all typedefs myself, except maybe > for "int" variants. Ditto that "*_t" convention. > > Anyone feel strongly pro-typedef?
I think that typedefs are useful when a level of indirection is needed, it is non-trivial to define the type(u32, u8, intptr_t, etc.) or the type itself is horrible to spell out(pointer to a function which takes a pointer to....) When the type is striaghtforward(int or struct), then typedef can make things less readable. "typedef struct x x_t" is such an example. -- Øyvind Harboe Embedded software and hardware consulting services http://consulting.zylin.com _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
