Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.arch.embedded > #26255

Re: Dimension of a matrix

Path csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!news.dfncis.de!not-for-mail
From Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de>
Newsgroups comp.arch.embedded
Subject Re: Dimension of a matrix
Date Sat, 25 Mar 2017 20:08:52 +0100
Lines 18
Message-ID <ejnti4FbilfU1@mid.dfncis.de> (permalink)
References <rtKdndPJ5_gVyknFnZ2dnUU7-UfNnZ2d@giganews.com> <ob2kn7$vd$3@dont-email.me> <ob6bi3$a7o$1@dont-email.me>
Mime-Version 1.0
Content-Type text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding 7bit
X-Trace news.dfncis.de /HEkVHtwQXVYmyG/0n3HfwwPzWopMTDS6L6hyQwl0jIrcOoAejhiFvgwgo
Cancel-Lock sha1:dgIYvSXaiwwfHpl8mTpNHF6EYi4=
User-Agent Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0
In-Reply-To <ob6bi3$a7o$1@dont-email.me>
Xref csiph.com comp.arch.embedded:26255

Show key headers only | View raw

Am 25.03.2017 um 19:12 schrieb Les Cargill:
> David Brown wrote:

> I could not tell you which versions of which compilers support this,
> but in some toolchains, it's possible to specify the size of an array
> being passed - void p(char x[256])... .

All C compilers are actually required to allow you to pass a size like 
that.  It doesn't have any effect whatsoever, though.  Any number you 
put between those [] is really just decoration.  These 4 function 
declarations are totally equivalent:

	void p(char x[256]);
	void p(char x[7]);
	void p(char x[]);
	void p(char *x);

Back to comp.arch.embedded | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-23 18:17 -0500
  Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-23 23:21 -0700
    Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 09:18 +0100
      Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-24 18:24 +0000
        Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-24 19:32 -0500
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Stefan Reuther <stefan.news@arcor.de> - 2017-03-25 09:59 +0100
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:08 -0500
        Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-25 01:57 +0100
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-25 18:34 +1100
            Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-26 23:53 +0000
              Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 09:51 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-27 20:19 +1100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 12:17 +0200
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-25 09:20 -0700
        Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-03-24 23:14 -0400
          Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-25 11:07 -0500
            Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2017-03-26 05:45 -0400
              Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-26 13:14 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-26 11:08 -0700
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-26 20:24 +0200
              Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-26 15:16 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-27 00:09 +0000
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-26 19:43 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-27 16:57 +0100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-27 11:53 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-27 22:04 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-27 18:32 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Clifford Heath <no.spam@please.net> - 2017-03-28 11:03 +1100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-27 22:07 +0100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-27 23:42 -0700
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-28 09:22 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-28 00:42 -0700
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tom Gardner <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> - 2017-03-28 09:07 +0100
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-28 19:34 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-29 11:39 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-28 19:29 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-29 10:31 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-30 00:23 +0000
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-29 19:31 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Phil Martel <pomartel@comcast.net> - 2017-03-30 11:51 -0400
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-30 19:16 -0500
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-31 09:21 +0200
                Re: Type-safety and C++, was: Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <seemywebsite@myfooter.really> - 2017-03-28 14:19 -0500
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-24 11:05 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 17:33 +0100
        Re: Dimension of a matrix Tim Wescott <tim@seemywebsite.com> - 2017-03-24 12:09 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:09 -0500
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:05 -0500
  Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-24 09:20 +0100
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 13:12 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix Hans-Bernhard Bröker <HBBroeker@t-online.de> - 2017-03-25 20:08 +0100
        Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 15:17 -0500
          Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 17:32 +0200
            Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-26 11:55 -0500
              Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-26 21:23 +0200
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-29 19:36 -0500
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-30 00:36 +0000
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2017-03-29 19:55 -0700
                Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-30 09:49 +0200
                Re: Dimension of a matrix Simon Clubley <clubley@remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP> - 2017-03-30 18:07 +0000
                Re: Dimension of a matrix David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2017-03-30 09:47 +0200
  Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-25 19:08 +0100
    Re: Dimension of a matrix Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2017-03-25 15:21 -0500
      Re: Dimension of a matrix Wouter van Ooijen <wouter@voti.nl> - 2017-03-26 14:43 +0200

csiph-web