On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 19:37:54 UTC, Alex Parrill
wrote:
It's a flexible array member [1], not a pointer. Changing it to
`char*` would make it incompatible with the C functions using
it.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexible_array_member
TIL a new detail about C on the D
On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 16:59:09 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
That's typically right, but since this case does it in-place
instead of pointed, the zero length array is most accurate.
I didn't consider that the name is placed right after the struct.
Thanks !
The struct core.sys.linux.sys.inotify.inotify_event contains the
field "char[0] name" which corresponds to "char name[]" in C.
Why it has been translated to "char[0]" ?
For me "char*" would have been more appropriate.
On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 16:49:39 UTC, badlink wrote:
The struct core.sys.linux.sys.inotify.inotify_event contains
the field "char[0] name" which corresponds to "char name[]" in
C.
Why it has been translated to "char[0]" ?
In that structure, the name is appended directly to the end
On Wednesday, 9 September 2015 at 16:49:39 UTC, badlink wrote:
The struct core.sys.linux.sys.inotify.inotify_event contains
the field "char[0] name" which corresponds to "char name[]" in
C.
Why it has been translated to "char[0]" ?
For me "char*" would have been more appropriate.
It's a
