• badlink (4/4) Sep 09 2015 The struct core.sys.linux.sys.inotify.inotify_event contains the
• Adam D. Ruppe (8/13) Sep 09 2015 In that structure, the name is appended directly to the end of
• badlink (4/6) Sep 09 2015 I didn't consider that the name is placed right after the struct.
• Alex Parrill (4/9) Sep 09 2015 It's a flexible array member [1], not a pointer. Changing it to
• badlink (3/7) Sep 10 2015 TIL a new detail about C on the D forum ;)

"badlink" <andrea.9940 gmail.com> writes:

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.

"Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:

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 of 
the data instead of pointed to. The size isn't known at compile 
time, so a zero-length placeholder is there instead.

You'd access it by using the .ptr property and get the length out 
of the `len` field.

 For me "char*" would have been more appropriate.

That's typically right, but since this case does it in-place 
instead of pointed, the zero length array is most accurate.

"badlink" <andrea.9940 gmail.com> writes:

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 !

"Alex Parrill" <initrd.gz gmail.com> writes:

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 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

"badlink" <andrea.9940 gmail.com> writes:

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 forum ;)