Why 'struct foo *x' instead of 'foo *x'

[John Kallen]

In article <10213 at claris.com> kevin at claris.com (Kevin Watts) writes:
>I've never liked the typedef nonsense.  C++'s approach is, IMHO, the way
>C should have behaved from the beginning.  Since I've never yet had to
>convert any C code to C++, I've had no problems with compatability.

Does anybody know the reason why structs are defined as they are in C?
I.e. why do I have to say "struct foo" instead of just the tag "foo"?

John.
_______________________________________________________________________________
 | |   |   |    |\ | |   /|\ | John Kallen            
 | |\ \|/ \|  * |/ | |/|  |  | PoBox 11215             "Life. Don't talk to me 
 | |\ /|\  |\ * |\ |   |  |  | Stanford CA 94309        about life."         
_|_|___|___|____|_\|___|__|__|_jkl at csli.stanford.edu___________________________