is this intentional?

[SM Ryan]

# >>This is one of the reasons why one should never use typedef to
# >>generate a "type" which is a pointer to something.
# >
# > I wouldn't say "never".
# [snip: good counter-example]
#
# Right, I should not have said "never", either.
# s/never/nearly never/
# I have done this in code of mine, too, until I realised that
# most of the time I just wanted to get around typing the extra

Really says something about the state of language design when you need
a catalog of odd rules to keep your programs comprehendable to yourself.

 

[Michael Mair]

# >>This is one of the reasons why one should never use typedef to
# >>generate a "type" which is a pointer to something.
# >
# > I wouldn't say "never".
# [snip: good counter-example]
#
# Right, I should not have said "never", either.
# s/never/nearly never/
# I have done this in code of mine, too, until I realised that
# most of the time I just wanted to get around typing the extra

Really says something about the state of language design when you need
a catalog of odd rules to keep your programs comprehendable to yourself.

This was more about clarity and minimising the opportunity for
errors than comprehendability. As said above, I did not have a
problem or bugs in my code but the method has disadvantages if
someone else wants to work with the code.

Cheers
Michael