Personally I don't have any strong opinion on the syntax for pointer types; I used pointer(foo) only because it was the closest analogy to the current syntax.
Even if pointers are introduced I don't see the point in changing sscanf and reduce it to a normal function. It's already very convenient, for instance in the way one can declare variables directly in the argument list:
if (sscanf (str, "%d %d %s", int a, int b, string rest) == 3) { ... do stuff with a, b and rest ... }
/ Martin Stjernholm, Roxen IS
Previous text:
2003-04-16 02:50: Subject: Pointers/lvalues
int *foo <-- good if we use pointers int &foo <-- good if we use references
Mind you, if we actually implement _pointers_, sscanf should most likely change to use them as well. Overall, the pointer syntax is more complex than references BUT it is more clear in the code (i.e if you call a method that takes a pointer, you need to specifically make the variable a pointer).
I'd really rather avoid sscanf("%d, %f", &it, &ft). But alas, 'int *foo' is better than 'ref(int) foo', 'pointer(int) foo' or similar constructions. Pike IS C/C++ like, so why invent a new _syntax_ when there's already a couple that are widely used?
/ David Hedbor