typedef /struct and the scope problems

[myth.drannon]

lets say I have a header file :

struct AAAA
{
blabla.....
};
typedef struct AAAA A;
typedef struct BBB
{
blabla...
.....
} B;
I try to compile it and get an error message that "AAA" has already
been declared in the current scope ! ( And I checked everywhere it is
not ! )
What's funny is , that when I remove the second typedef it compiles
well.
Any ideas why such a weird behavior ?
Thanks ?

[Jordan Abel]

On 2006-03-03, my**********@gm ail.com <my**********@g mail.com> wrote:

lets say I have a header file :

struct AAAA
{
blabla.....
};
typedef struct AAAA A;
typedef struct BBB
{
blabla...
.....
} B;
I try to compile it and get an error message that "AAA" has already
been declared in the current scope ! ( And I checked everywhere it is
not ! )
What's funny is , that when I remove the second typedef it compiles
well.
Any ideas why such a weird behavior ?
Thanks ?

No idea. What compiler are you using, it may be broken

[Keith Thompson]

"my**********@g mail.com" <my**********@g mail.com> writes:

lets say I have a header file :

struct AAAA
{
blabla.....
};
typedef struct AAAA A;
typedef struct BBB
{
blabla...
.....
} B;
I try to compile it and get an error message that "AAA" has already
been declared in the current scope ! ( And I checked everywhere it is
not ! )
What's funny is , that when I remove the second typedef it compiles
well.
Any ideas why such a weird behavior ?

That's odd, I get a parse error on "blabla.... .".

If I fix the syntax errors, it compiles without error. Obviously the
error is in code you haven't bothered to show us (probably on line
42).

If you post a complete compilable source file that exhibits the
problem, we can probably help. If not, we're not mindreaders.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[myth.drannon]

Intel's one.

[myth.drannon]

struct float
{
int e;
int m;
};

typedef struct float A;

typedef struct BBB
{
A floatA;
} B;

[Keith Thompson]

"my**********@g mail.com" <my**********@g mail.com> writes:

Intel's one.

Intel's one what?

Please read <http://cfaj.freeshell. org/google/> (that URL has been
posted here hundreds of times).

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[Keith Thompson]

"my**********@g mail.com" <my**********@g mail.com> writes:

struct float
{
int e;
int m;
};

typedef struct float A;

typedef struct BBB
{
A floatA;
} B;

Without context (see <http://cfaj.freeshell. org/google/>), it's
difficult to know what you're asking about this code.

But the fact that "float" is a reserved word is going to cause some
problems. You didn't mention any syntax errors in your original post.
Is this *really* the exact code that you compiled? If not, please
post the exact code (copy-and-paste it, *don't* re-type it) and
provide enough context so we can figure out why you're showing it to
us.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keit h) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <*> <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.

[myth.drannon]

ok _float instead of float :) , names aside ....

struct _float
{
int e;
int m;
};

typedef struct _float A;

typedef struct BBB
{
A floatA;
} B;

removing
typedef struct _float A;

and using :
struct _float floatA
will compile .... still why this typedef line creates problems.

[Nils O. Selåsdal]

my**********@gm ail.com wrote:

ok _float instead of float :) , names aside ....

struct _float
{
int e;
int m;
};

typedef struct _float A;

typedef struct BBB
{
A floatA;
} B;

removing
typedef struct _float A;

and using :
struct _float floatA
will compile .... still why this typedef line creates problems.

There is no problem. It compiles fine here.
If you want further help, I suggest you post the /actual/
code. Then you post the actual command line used to compile it,
and the output/errors that produces.

[CBFalconer]

"my**********@g mail.com" wrote:

ok _float instead of float :) , names aside ....

struct _float
{
int e;
int m;
};

typedef struct _float A;

typedef struct BBB
{
A floatA;
} B;

removing
typedef struct _float A;

and using :
struct _float floatA
will compile .... still why this typedef line creates problems.

Don't alter material you quote. Do preserve attribution lines for
any quoted material. Do snip anything not germane to your reply.

_float is an identifier reserved for the implementation. You
should not use it. In general, do not use any identifiers that
begin with a '_' (although that is slight overkill).

--
"If you want to post a followup via groups.google.c om, don't use
the broken "Reply" link at the bottom of the article. Click on
"show options" at the top of the article, then click on the
"Reply" at the bottom of the article headers." - Keith Thompson
More details at: <http://cfaj.freeshell. org/google/>
Also see <http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsrep ly/>