Mixing
How to initialize this array of structures of array of structures?
4
I have the following code, which is not working as expected. It compiles, but throws a lot of warnings and segfaults when executed:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output {
A,
B,
C,
D,
};
struct translation {
char *from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary {
struct translation *foo;
struct translation *bar;
};
enum language {
ONE,
ANOTHER,
};
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = {
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = {
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[ONE].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
I am probably initializing languages the wrong way.
- I would like to have that
languagesarray in which I can access different dictionaries bylanguage:languages[ONE]
- I would like to access then different translation tables with the dictionary field:
languages[ONE].foo
- All translation tables accessed with a language+field pair may have different array lengths, as shown in the code example
Is that even possible? What am I doing wrong?
When compiling with gcc I get this (cropped) output:
asdf.c:27:17: warning: braces around scalar initializer
.foo = {
^
asdf.c:27:17: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:25: warning: braces around scalar initializer
{"LF", A},
^
asdf.c:28:25: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:26: warning: initialization of ‘struct translation *’ from incompatible pointer type ‘char *’ [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
[...]
The same warnings/notes repeat for multiple parts of the code.
c arrays struct initialization
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
add a comment |
4
I have the following code, which is not working as expected. It compiles, but throws a lot of warnings and segfaults when executed:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output {
A,
B,
C,
D,
};
struct translation {
char *from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary {
struct translation *foo;
struct translation *bar;
};
enum language {
ONE,
ANOTHER,
};
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = {
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = {
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[ONE].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
I am probably initializing languages the wrong way.
- I would like to have that
languagesarray in which I can access different dictionaries bylanguage:languages[ONE]
- I would like to access then different translation tables with the dictionary field:
languages[ONE].foo
- All translation tables accessed with a language+field pair may have different array lengths, as shown in the code example
Is that even possible? What am I doing wrong?
When compiling with gcc I get this (cropped) output:
asdf.c:27:17: warning: braces around scalar initializer
.foo = {
^
asdf.c:27:17: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:25: warning: braces around scalar initializer
{"LF", A},
^
asdf.c:28:25: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:26: warning: initialization of ‘struct translation *’ from incompatible pointer type ‘char *’ [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
[...]
The same warnings/notes repeat for multiple parts of the code.
c arrays struct initialization
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
@FiddlingBits Actually, that could be a workaround! :-) I tried with(no size) but that was illegal. You can post that as an answer if you want. Although I will wait before accepting to see if there is a way of making this work without having to specify a dictionary table size "big enough" to hold all translations.
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:35
add a comment |
4
4
4
1
I have the following code, which is not working as expected. It compiles, but throws a lot of warnings and segfaults when executed:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output {
A,
B,
C,
D,
};
struct translation {
char *from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary {
struct translation *foo;
struct translation *bar;
};
enum language {
ONE,
ANOTHER,
};
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = {
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = {
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[ONE].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
I am probably initializing languages the wrong way.
- I would like to have that
languagesarray in which I can access different dictionaries bylanguage:languages[ONE]
- I would like to access then different translation tables with the dictionary field:
languages[ONE].foo
- All translation tables accessed with a language+field pair may have different array lengths, as shown in the code example
Is that even possible? What am I doing wrong?
When compiling with gcc I get this (cropped) output:
asdf.c:27:17: warning: braces around scalar initializer
.foo = {
^
asdf.c:27:17: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:25: warning: braces around scalar initializer
{"LF", A},
^
asdf.c:28:25: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:26: warning: initialization of ‘struct translation *’ from incompatible pointer type ‘char *’ [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
[...]
The same warnings/notes repeat for multiple parts of the code.
c arrays struct initialization
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
I have the following code, which is not working as expected. It compiles, but throws a lot of warnings and segfaults when executed:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output {
A,
B,
C,
D,
};
struct translation {
char *from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary {
struct translation *foo;
struct translation *bar;
};
enum language {
ONE,
ANOTHER,
};
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = {
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = {
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = {
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[ONE].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
I am probably initializing languages the wrong way.
- I would like to have that
languagesarray in which I can access different dictionaries bylanguage:languages[ONE]
- I would like to access then different translation tables with the dictionary field:
languages[ONE].foo
- All translation tables accessed with a language+field pair may have different array lengths, as shown in the code example
Is that even possible? What am I doing wrong?
When compiling with gcc I get this (cropped) output:
asdf.c:27:17: warning: braces around scalar initializer
.foo = {
^
asdf.c:27:17: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:25: warning: braces around scalar initializer
{"LF", A},
^
asdf.c:28:25: note: (near initialization for ‘languages[0].foo’)
asdf.c:28:26: warning: initialization of ‘struct translation *’ from incompatible pointer type ‘char *’ [-Wincompatible-pointer-types]
[...]
The same warnings/notes repeat for multiple parts of the code.
c arrays struct initialization
c arrays struct initialization
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
asked Nov 19 '18 at 21:24
PequePeque
5,70733362
5,70733362
@FiddlingBits Actually, that could be a workaround! :-) I tried with(no size) but that was illegal. You can post that as an answer if you want. Although I will wait before accepting to see if there is a way of making this work without having to specify a dictionary table size "big enough" to hold all translations.
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:35
add a comment |
@FiddlingBits Actually, that could be a workaround! :-) I tried with(no size) but that was illegal. You can post that as an answer if you want. Although I will wait before accepting to see if there is a way of making this work without having to specify a dictionary table size "big enough" to hold all translations.
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:35
@FiddlingBits Actually, that could be a workaround! :-) I tried with
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:35
@FiddlingBits Actually, that could be a workaround! :-) I tried with
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:35
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
3
Here are two things you can do:
- Allocate memory for
struct translation *foo;andstruct translation *bar;(you can also usemallocto dynamically allocate memory). For example:
struct dictionary
{
struct translation foo[10];
struct translation bar[10];
};
- Use a compound literal in your definition:
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
Note
As mentioned by @M.M, adding the qualifier const before struct dictionary is a good idea if its values won't change during runtime.
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
1
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
something likestruct translation foo[10];(leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language
– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
1
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
|
show 5 more comments
1
Just initialize each array separately:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output
{
a
, b
, c
, d
};
struct translation
{
char const * from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary
{
struct translation * foo;
struct translation * bar;
};
enum language
{
one
, another
, languages_count
};
struct translation one_language_foo_translations =
{
{"LF" , a}
, {"LLF", c}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation one_language_bar_translations =
{
{"L", b}
};
struct translation another_language_foo_translations =
{
{"FF" , b}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation another_language_bar_translations =
{
{"LF", b}
, {"R" , c}
, {"RR", d}
};
struct dictionary languages[languages_count] =
{
{one_language_foo_translations, one_language_bar_translations}
, {another_language_foo_translations, another_language_bar_translations}
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[one].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
online compiler
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
StackExchange.snippets.init();
});
});
}, "code-snippets");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53382857%2fhow-to-initialize-this-array-of-structures-of-array-of-structures%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
3
Here are two things you can do:
- Allocate memory for
struct translation *foo;andstruct translation *bar;(you can also usemallocto dynamically allocate memory). For example:
struct dictionary
{
struct translation foo[10];
struct translation bar[10];
};
- Use a compound literal in your definition:
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
Note
As mentioned by @M.M, adding the qualifier const before struct dictionary is a good idea if its values won't change during runtime.
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
1
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
something likestruct translation foo[10];(leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language
– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
1
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
|
show 5 more comments
3
Here are two things you can do:
- Allocate memory for
struct translation *foo;andstruct translation *bar;(you can also usemallocto dynamically allocate memory). For example:
struct dictionary
{
struct translation foo[10];
struct translation bar[10];
};
- Use a compound literal in your definition:
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
Note
As mentioned by @M.M, adding the qualifier const before struct dictionary is a good idea if its values won't change during runtime.
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
1
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
something likestruct translation foo[10];(leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language
– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
1
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
|
show 5 more comments
3
3
3
Here are two things you can do:
- Allocate memory for
struct translation *foo;andstruct translation *bar;(you can also usemallocto dynamically allocate memory). For example:
struct dictionary
{
struct translation foo[10];
struct translation bar[10];
};
- Use a compound literal in your definition:
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
Note
As mentioned by @M.M, adding the qualifier const before struct dictionary is a good idea if its values won't change during runtime.
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
Here are two things you can do:
- Allocate memory for
struct translation *foo;andstruct translation *bar;(you can also usemallocto dynamically allocate memory). For example:
struct dictionary
{
struct translation foo[10];
struct translation bar[10];
};
- Use a compound literal in your definition:
struct dictionary languages = {
[ONE] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"LF", A},
{"LLF", C},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"L", B},
},
},
[ANOTHER] = {
.foo = (struct translation ){
{"FF", B},
{"RRF", D},
},
.bar = (struct translation ){
{"LF", B},
{"R", C},
{"RR", D},
},
},
};
Note
As mentioned by @M.M, adding the qualifier const before struct dictionary is a good idea if its values won't change during runtime.
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
edited Nov 19 '18 at 22:05
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:37
Fiddling BitsFiddling Bits
7,10821938
7,10821938
1
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
something likestruct translation foo[10];(leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language
– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
1
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
|
show 5 more comments
1
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
something likestruct translation foo[10];(leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language
– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
1
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
1
1
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Love the latter <3. I am learning a lot of C with this project. :-D
– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
Would appreciate knowing why I was downvoted.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:42
something like
struct translation foo[10]; (leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
something like
struct translation foo[10]; (leaving some of them uninitialized) is a very poor idea while compound literals are feature of C99 language– VTT
Nov 19 '18 at 21:46
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
@VTT Sure. I mentioned it as an option, not a recommendation.
– Fiddling Bits
Nov 19 '18 at 21:47
1
1
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
@VTT not necessarily; in some systems memory is cheap and other concerns such as code clarity, portability, ease of development, ease of runtime access etc. may have a higher priority
– M.M
Nov 19 '18 at 22:03
|
show 5 more comments
1
Just initialize each array separately:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output
{
a
, b
, c
, d
};
struct translation
{
char const * from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary
{
struct translation * foo;
struct translation * bar;
};
enum language
{
one
, another
, languages_count
};
struct translation one_language_foo_translations =
{
{"LF" , a}
, {"LLF", c}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation one_language_bar_translations =
{
{"L", b}
};
struct translation another_language_foo_translations =
{
{"FF" , b}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation another_language_bar_translations =
{
{"LF", b}
, {"R" , c}
, {"RR", d}
};
struct dictionary languages[languages_count] =
{
{one_language_foo_translations, one_language_bar_translations}
, {another_language_foo_translations, another_language_bar_translations}
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[one].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
online compiler
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
add a comment |
1
Just initialize each array separately:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output
{
a
, b
, c
, d
};
struct translation
{
char const * from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary
{
struct translation * foo;
struct translation * bar;
};
enum language
{
one
, another
, languages_count
};
struct translation one_language_foo_translations =
{
{"LF" , a}
, {"LLF", c}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation one_language_bar_translations =
{
{"L", b}
};
struct translation another_language_foo_translations =
{
{"FF" , b}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation another_language_bar_translations =
{
{"LF", b}
, {"R" , c}
, {"RR", d}
};
struct dictionary languages[languages_count] =
{
{one_language_foo_translations, one_language_bar_translations}
, {another_language_foo_translations, another_language_bar_translations}
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[one].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
online compiler
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
add a comment |
1
1
1
Just initialize each array separately:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output
{
a
, b
, c
, d
};
struct translation
{
char const * from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary
{
struct translation * foo;
struct translation * bar;
};
enum language
{
one
, another
, languages_count
};
struct translation one_language_foo_translations =
{
{"LF" , a}
, {"LLF", c}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation one_language_bar_translations =
{
{"L", b}
};
struct translation another_language_foo_translations =
{
{"FF" , b}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation another_language_bar_translations =
{
{"LF", b}
, {"R" , c}
, {"RR", d}
};
struct dictionary languages[languages_count] =
{
{one_language_foo_translations, one_language_bar_translations}
, {another_language_foo_translations, another_language_bar_translations}
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[one].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
online compiler
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
Just initialize each array separately:
#include <stdio.h>
enum output
{
a
, b
, c
, d
};
struct translation
{
char const * from;
enum output to;
};
struct dictionary
{
struct translation * foo;
struct translation * bar;
};
enum language
{
one
, another
, languages_count
};
struct translation one_language_foo_translations =
{
{"LF" , a}
, {"LLF", c}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation one_language_bar_translations =
{
{"L", b}
};
struct translation another_language_foo_translations =
{
{"FF" , b}
, {"RRF", d}
};
struct translation another_language_bar_translations =
{
{"LF", b}
, {"R" , c}
, {"RR", d}
};
struct dictionary languages[languages_count] =
{
{one_language_foo_translations, one_language_bar_translations}
, {another_language_foo_translations, another_language_bar_translations}
};
int main(void)
{
printf("%sn", languages[one].foo[0].from);
return 0;
}
online compiler
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
answered Nov 19 '18 at 21:41
VTTVTT
24k42345
24k42345
add a comment |
add a comment |
draft saved
draft discarded
Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
draft saved
draft discarded
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f53382857%2fhow-to-initialize-this-array-of-structures-of-array-of-structures%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
@FiddlingBits Actually, that could be a workaround! :-) I tried with
(no size) but that was illegal. You can post that as an answer if you want. Although I will wait before accepting to see if there is a way of making this work without having to specify a dictionary table size "big enough" to hold all translations.– Peque
Nov 19 '18 at 21:35