How do you like to indent the CASE statement?

Thanks for the replies everyone.

Oh no, don’t spark off the H0ly w*r of tabs versus spaces, Rick!
H0ly w*r
w*r

That reminds me. While we’re at it, when declaring pointers in C, where do you put the star? This is what I usually do when declaring pointers:

int *point;

and this is what I do when when I have a function that returns a pointer:

int* function(){

I’m quite new to C, so I haven’t thought very hard about why I do it like that. I’ve seen people do it different ways, so I’m wondering, how do you do it?

I always use “type *name” notation regardless of whether or not it’s a function. I learned that notation back in school and it’s stuck.

I started out usually putting the star against the type, the thinking being that it’s a pointer that’s being declared, like:

int* point;

int * point;

int *point;

int *a, *b, *c;

‘int* point’ suggests that the author of the code either doesn’t know the C language’s grammar or wishes it were different. Neither of those possibilities inspires confidence!

Exactly. And the idea of suffixing the asterisk to the variable type falls apart here:

int* one, two;

where the two variables created are very much not the same.

[saying what Andy said, in a different way ☺]

I use int* one because its the way I say it, one is an intpointer. I read int *one as int is the contentsofone.

when I cast a pointer I use (int*) not (int *). when I copy a structure I use

test_t a = *b;

so * on the right of a name is a pointer and on the left is contentsof

Words can’t describe how much I hate the nuances of C syntax. I think it’s why I’ve never felt entirely comfortable using it.

FreePascal on the other hand… I really like their version of Pascal. Probably because it’s actually useful unlike some other dialects. What I was going to say is that things like pointers, variable declaration etc is a lot more readable.

I guess I’m just saying that C can be unpleasant to look at and sometimes confusing, especially where multiplication and pointers occur on the same line.

Ah, yes, Pascal. Where they had to botch in @ and ^ since the original spec didn’t want you to do such unsafe things as deal with addresses and pointers, leaving indirected pointers to be a mess compared to C’s . vs → syntax.

As for multiplication and pointers on the same line, it isn’t too hard. Remember the compiler’s parser is braindead. Just omit one single } and you’ll see what I mean…