Home/ Questions/Q 9197903
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Asked: 2026-06-17T22:10:33+00:00

When I initialize a single element into a void structure, it works fine: void*

  • 0

When I initialize a single element into a void structure, it works fine:

void* CMD_ARRAY[] = 
{
  {"+++\r"},
  {"+++\r"},
  {"+++\r"},
};

However, when I try to add more elements to the structure, i.e.:

void* CMD_ARRAY[] = 
{
  {"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
  {"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
  {"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
};

This results in an error:

expected a “}”

What is the difference between a single element as in the 1st example, and a structure of a structures (which are also considered as elements)?

How can I achieve initialization of this void structure with mixed types?

Update:
So I understand that the compiler doesn’t know how to handle different types in the same elements. Is there a way to define these types on the fly (i.e. using casting) without actually defining the structure outside this definition (i.e. using an array of strucutres)?

Share

Leave an answer

You must login to add an answer.

Need An Account,

1 Answer

  1. Editorial Team

    I would suggest that the compiler can’t guess certain details regarding your implicit struct declarations. For example, how is your compiler to guess that I wanted y in the example below to be a short?

    struct foo { char *x; short y; unsigned int z; };

void* CMD_ARRAY[] = 
{
  &(struct foo){"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
  &(struct foo){"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
  &(struct foo){"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
};

    This could be expanded at the cost of legibility to:

    void* CMD_ARRAY[] = 
{
  &(struct { char *x; short y; unsigned int z; }){"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
  &(struct { char *x; short y; unsigned int z; }){"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
  &(struct { char *x; short y; unsigned int z; }){"+++\r" ,  4,  1300},
};

    edit: In addition to the cost of legibility, consider what will happen if you decide to change your struct at the higher level. You’ll have to do plenty of finding/replacing in the lower level. Does this sound sweet to you?

    • 0