Int* a;

int *a, because you can write int *a, *b, but you can't write it with int* a

int* a, *b;

Wow, I can't believe this. That's stupid as fuck.
int a, b;
Creates two ints. So why doesn't
int* a, b;
Create two pointers ints? It says a is int* but b is int. That makes no sense at all.

This might be the dumbest thing I've seen in this language. Been quite impressed with C overall.

this. unironically

you're using both options but you're only allowed to use one

>but you're only allowed to use one

Attached: 1417760347822.gif (245x320, 150K)

well, according to this thread

I started doing int* when I started learning C++

anything other than int *b; is nigger tier

i dont understand whats happening in this thread.

I was going to say who cares until i saw this.
That is fucking stupid, they should change this or at least have the compiler warn about it.

This is the reason I just use one init. per line, e.g.
int* a;
int* b;

Consistency is king (and it makes for better diffs, too)

I think that

int* a

Looks semantically better, when you consider how declaring things works in C.

However, I learnt it as

int *b

and I just can't bring myself to use the int* style because I'm so used to what I've learnt.

>int times a

>muliple declarations on a single line
please stay away from programming forever