Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.musoftware.de!wum.musoftware.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!news.dfncis.de!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?B?SGFucy1CZXJuaGFyZCBCcsO2a2Vy?= Newsgroups: comp.std.c Subject: Re: Initial draft proposal: "Safe arrays and pointers for C" Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 22:57:03 +0200 Lines: 16 Message-ID: References: <502949DA.9000604@animats.com> <50297066.1010202@loria.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: news.dfncis.de syFLEfZW0HmgnotTwfZFnAL9v2Rd8R2yc6xwr26QSNt3eIsAAU2Zufm4gcHvj/4ppWSeSuL+u/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:Bzn7IzMjsdaYr59RN8aq2lbgoNE= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120604 Thunderbird/13.0 In-Reply-To: Xref: csiph.com comp.std.c:1484 On 15.08.2012 01:42, Keith Thompson wrote: > Hans-Bernhard Bröker writes: >> On 14.08.2012 22:24, John Nagle wrote: >>> It's a fully qualified array pointer, >> It is not, and it cannot be, because such a thing as an "array pointer" >> does not exist in C. There are pointers to arrays (the abovementioned >> 'a' is one), and there arrays of pointers, but no "array pointers". > I'd say that "array pointer" is a reasonable informal way to refer to > a pointer to array type. Agreed. But the way John Nagle is wielding the term, that doesn't seem to be what he meant by it. So whatever that thing actually is supposed to be, at the very least it needs a different name.