Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #2800 > unrolled thread
| Started by | "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2011-03-29 12:27 -0500 |
| Last post | 2011-04-11 14:27 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 404 — 24 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-03-29 12:27 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-03-30 00:03 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-03-30 12:39 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-03-30 20:42 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-03-31 12:38 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-03-31 19:28 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-01 12:40 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-02 02:33 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-04 12:42 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-04 20:12 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-04 16:31 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-05 12:39 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-05 19:13 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-05 20:16 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Garrett Hartshaw <ghartshaw@gmail.com> - 2011-04-06 01:36 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-06 10:32 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-06 12:20 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-06 18:42 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-06 14:47 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-06 23:51 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-07 09:44 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-07 12:28 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-07 21:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-07 18:16 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-08 01:14 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-07 23:03 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-08 08:48 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-08 04:15 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-08 12:39 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-08 21:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-09 13:15 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-09 20:32 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-09 22:05 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-10 03:44 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-09 23:07 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-10 13:32 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-10 10:15 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-10 18:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-10 17:55 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-11 12:40 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-11 22:07 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-12 12:51 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 19:53 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-13 12:32 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-14 14:02 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-14 12:53 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-14 19:17 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-15 12:25 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 11:07 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-16 08:02 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-15 22:21 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-04-15 14:22 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-15 23:01 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-16 10:10 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-15 23:24 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects drew@furrfu.invalid (Drew Lawson) - 2011-04-15 21:48 +0000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-15 23:16 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-15 19:05 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-18 12:44 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 21:35 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-19 13:46 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-20 17:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-23 12:59 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-23 20:31 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-24 09:26 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-24 00:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-24 11:24 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-24 02:16 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-24 14:10 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-24 04:37 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-24 16:11 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-24 13:31 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-24 17:57 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-24 17:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-25 10:19 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-25 10:12 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-25 00:46 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-25 11:59 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-25 05:01 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-25 14:56 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-25 10:57 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-26 12:36 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-26 22:42 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-27 12:53 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-27 19:06 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-27 20:09 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-04-29 12:57 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-29 19:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-29 19:56 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-02 13:20 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-02 22:43 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-05 14:13 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-05 22:21 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-06 10:49 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-06 12:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-07 11:34 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-08 04:05 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-10 12:31 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-10 22:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-12 12:19 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-13 09:54 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-14 11:20 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-14 23:59 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-17 12:59 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-18 19:36 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-19 13:20 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-20 14:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-23 13:53 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-23 22:53 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-23 23:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-23 23:19 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 02:26 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 13:16 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 14:58 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 15:05 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 17:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 17:58 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 21:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 21:11 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 00:12 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 00:33 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 11:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 12:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 12:56 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 13:15 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 16:36 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 16:47 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 17:15 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 17:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 21:09 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 22:24 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 01:28 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-25 09:57 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 16:50 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-25 12:01 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 16:59 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-25 12:56 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 21:46 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-25 20:02 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 01:37 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-26 09:08 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 15:19 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-26 14:45 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 21:02 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-27 09:34 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 14:46 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-27 15:07 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 21:42 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-27 19:34 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 01:24 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-28 10:58 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 19:41 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-28 20:38 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 12:32 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-29 10:05 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 20:13 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-29 19:38 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-30 17:01 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-05-31 09:45 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 20:33 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-06-01 09:57 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 15:53 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 16:46 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 19:44 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 19:59 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 21:41 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:21 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:32 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-06-01 12:33 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 19:18 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 19:38 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 20:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 20:18 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:01 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:25 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:43 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:49 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:27 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 00:26 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 00:33 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 08:52 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-06-01 15:37 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 07:46 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 21:22 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-01 10:31 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 09:28 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:59 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 15:05 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:35 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-02 10:51 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 00:28 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 16:33 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 09:03 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 01:23 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> - 2011-06-02 17:31 +0900
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-02 01:39 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-01 11:28 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:54 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-01 12:08 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:41 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 14:56 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:17 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:17 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 15:32 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:58 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 16:31 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 08:50 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 21:05 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> - 2011-06-01 16:38 -0400
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:20 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 14:42 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-05-27 17:44 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 03:11 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-05-28 19:21 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 12:50 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-05-29 07:21 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 15:30 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 20:43 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 21:51 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 03:08 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-05-30 17:39 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 06:05 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-05-31 09:38 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 20:50 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects SG <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2011-05-31 02:23 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 13:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Fred Zwarts \(KVI\)" <F.Zwarts@KVI.nl> - 2011-05-31 15:17 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 20:43 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Michael Doubez <michael.doubez@free.fr> - 2011-05-31 02:43 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 14:38 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 20:45 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 21:11 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 10:23 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 03:08 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 15:59 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 13:45 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 14:23 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 16:02 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 16:33 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 19:52 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 20:02 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-01 09:16 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 21:00 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-01 10:09 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 22:31 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-01 11:58 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:21 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects crisgoogle <crisd@telus.net> - 2011-06-01 16:22 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 00:48 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects crisgoogle <crisd@telus.net> - 2011-06-02 11:06 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 19:58 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects crisgoogle <crisd@telus.net> - 2011-06-02 13:28 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-03 01:16 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects crisgoogle <crisd@telus.net> - 2011-06-02 18:51 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects PaulR <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-03 04:59 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 23:21 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-01 14:46 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Michael Doubez <michael.doubez@free.fr> - 2011-06-01 00:46 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-29 20:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-05-29 23:11 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-25 08:15 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-24 22:23 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-05-24 17:01 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 11:48 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 04:06 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-05-25 13:50 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-05-25 19:03 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-25 12:44 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 21:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-25 22:20 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 11:00 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 12:07 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 13:09 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-26 09:32 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 11:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-26 23:07 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 13:22 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 14:14 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 15:27 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 15:52 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 16:45 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 17:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 17:41 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-27 07:44 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 21:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-27 09:05 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 00:15 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-27 11:32 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 01:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 01:56 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-27 13:18 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 11:06 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-27 22:28 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 12:51 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 13:58 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 14:34 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 15:14 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 15:18 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 15:24 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 15:31 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 15:53 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 16:18 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 20:35 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 21:23 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 22:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 22:15 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 00:40 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 00:53 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 01:32 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 01:49 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-28 13:17 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 03:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-28 15:35 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 12:24 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 08:21 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 22:04 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 09:17 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 09:32 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 22:58 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-29 10:06 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 23:51 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 03:20 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 12:34 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 12:56 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 13:49 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 14:48 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 15:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 19:35 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 19:59 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 20:17 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 20:44 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 21:00 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 22:07 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-26 14:38 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-26 21:15 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-27 12:43 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-27 20:20 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-28 11:41 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-28 19:10 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-05-31 12:26 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-31 20:49 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-01 12:46 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-01 20:26 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-02 12:36 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-02 20:23 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-02 10:34 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-03 01:41 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-02 16:06 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-02 16:12 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> - 2011-06-02 16:21 -1000
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-03 14:17 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-04 10:34 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-04 10:45 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-04 21:02 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-04 14:11 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-04 22:35 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-04 15:43 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-06-05 06:39 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-06-05 07:55 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-06-03 11:14 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-06-03 21:08 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-03 14:25 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-04 10:52 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-04 19:52 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-06-05 13:48 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-05 14:52 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Thomas J. Gritzan" <phygon_antispam@gmx.de> - 2011-06-05 18:03 +0200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-05 19:23 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-05 14:49 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-03 12:37 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-03 19:49 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-04 11:46 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-04 18:42 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-06 14:27 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-06 14:04 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-06-06 14:04 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-07 02:26 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-06 23:30 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-07 13:13 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-06-08 01:20 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-08 11:39 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-08 17:03 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-08 23:51 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-11 11:41 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-12 00:56 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-14 13:44 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-14 23:01 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-16 13:41 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-16 23:01 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-18 12:23 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-18 19:50 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-21 13:38 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-06-22 00:29 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Keith H Duggar <duggar@alum.mit.edu> - 2011-06-18 12:58 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "A. Bolmarcich" <aggedor@earl-grey.cloud9.net> - 2011-06-21 13:40 -0500
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-05-10 15:56 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-05-11 12:25 +1200
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-11 10:56 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-05-11 14:09 -0700
Re: Problem with array objects "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-05-12 13:31 +0100
Re: Problem with array objects Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 14:27 -0700
Page 10 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 21 Next page →
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 00:26 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <8VzFp.35720$h_.12130@newsfe30.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6040 |
"Leigh Johnston" <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote in message news:j6adnQ8edrlLIXvQnZ2dnUVZ8n2dnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 01/06/2011 22:43, Paul wrote: > > [snip] > >> So if char(*)[n] is, in your mind, a pointer to a 1d array what is a >> pointer to a 2d array? >> It surely cannot be the same type of pointer but I dunno. I presume it >> must be a pointer of type int(*)[n][n]. Is this correct? > > 'int(*)[n][n]' is a pointer to a 2D array yes; if it where not the > following would not compile: > > int array[7][42]; // this is a 2D array > int (*pointer_to_array)[7][42] = &array; > So does this point to an array of objects or a single object of array type?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 00:33 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <542dnY7aNpTEUXvQnZ2dnUVZ8nqdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #6052 |
On 02/06/2011 00:26, Paul wrote: > > "Leigh Johnston" <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote in message > news:j6adnQ8edrlLIXvQnZ2dnUVZ8n2dnZ2d@giganews.com... >> On 01/06/2011 22:43, Paul wrote: >> >> [snip] >> >>> So if char(*)[n] is, in your mind, a pointer to a 1d array what is a >>> pointer to a 2d array? >>> It surely cannot be the same type of pointer but I dunno. I presume it >>> must be a pointer of type int(*)[n][n]. Is this correct? >> >> 'int(*)[n][n]' is a pointer to a 2D array yes; if it where not the >> following would not compile: >> >> int array[7][42]; // this is a 2D array >> int (*pointer_to_array)[7][42] = &array; >> > So does this point to an array of objects or a single object of array type? The question makes no sense as "an array of objects" is "a single object of array type" (a "sub-object" is also an "object"). /Leigh
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 08:52 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <wjHFp.31751$Tw4.25197@newsfe26.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6055 |
"Leigh Johnston" <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote in message news:542dnY7aNpTEUXvQnZ2dnUVZ8nqdnZ2d@giganews.com... > On 02/06/2011 00:26, Paul wrote: >> >> "Leigh Johnston" <leigh@i42.co.uk> wrote in message >> news:j6adnQ8edrlLIXvQnZ2dnUVZ8n2dnZ2d@giganews.com... >>> On 01/06/2011 22:43, Paul wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>>> So if char(*)[n] is, in your mind, a pointer to a 1d array what is a >>>> pointer to a 2d array? >>>> It surely cannot be the same type of pointer but I dunno. I presume it >>>> must be a pointer of type int(*)[n][n]. Is this correct? >>> >>> 'int(*)[n][n]' is a pointer to a 2D array yes; if it where not the >>> following would not compile: >>> >>> int array[7][42]; // this is a 2D array >>> int (*pointer_to_array)[7][42] = &array; >>> >> So does this point to an array of objects or a single object of array >> type? > > The question makes no sense as "an array of objects" is "a single object > of array type" (a "sub-object" is also an "object"). > An array of objects is not the same thing as a single object. It's you who does not make sense.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Thomas David Rivers <rivers@dignus.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 15:37 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <4DE694FE.20606@dignus.com> |
| In reply to | #5983 |
Paul wrote:
>
> Well I don't know what definitons you are speaking about.
> As far as I can tell, the way I see arrays and pointers is the correct
> way , and it never did me any harm. If the C++ standard has some
> definiton that suggests a pointer of type pointer-to-X can only ever
> point to a single X object and nothing else then I would probably
> ignore the C++ standard and carry on with the opinion that the
> comittee had all become brian dead idiots, TBH :)
>
Oh, I'm disappointed to read that. I was hoping we could come to an
understanding that was rooted in the C/C++ language definitions (the
standard
documents) but I suppose I'm not able to explain things in a manner that you
agree with.
I'm afraid I will just have to drop things here.
I wish you the best of luck in everything you do.
- Dave Rivers -
--
rivers@dignus.com Work: (919) 676-0847
Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 07:46 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <94nj93F12lU8@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #5997 |
On 06/ 2/11 07:37 AM, Thomas David Rivers wrote: > Paul wrote: > >> >> Well I don't know what definitons you are speaking about. >> As far as I can tell, the way I see arrays and pointers is the correct >> way , and it never did me any harm. If the C++ standard has some >> definiton that suggests a pointer of type pointer-to-X can only ever >> point to a single X object and nothing else then I would probably >> ignore the C++ standard and carry on with the opinion that the >> comittee had all become brian dead idiots, TBH :) >> > > Oh, I'm disappointed to read that. I was hoping we could come to an > understanding that was rooted in the C/C++ language definitions (the > standard > documents) but I suppose I'm not able to explain things in a manner that you > agree with. Don't worry, no one else can either. Yours was a detailed and patient attempt and I'm sure those willing to learn would have learned a great deal form your postings. -- Ian Collins
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 21:22 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <_bxFp.30559$h35.23885@newsfe19.ams2> |
| In reply to | #5998 |
"Ian Collins" <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:94nj93F12lU8@mid.individual.net... > On 06/ 2/11 07:37 AM, Thomas David Rivers wrote: >> Paul wrote: >> >>> >>> Well I don't know what definitons you are speaking about. >>> As far as I can tell, the way I see arrays and pointers is the correct >>> way , and it never did me any harm. If the C++ standard has some >>> definiton that suggests a pointer of type pointer-to-X can only ever >>> point to a single X object and nothing else then I would probably >>> ignore the C++ standard and carry on with the opinion that the >>> comittee had all become brian dead idiots, TBH :) >>> >> >> Oh, I'm disappointed to read that. I was hoping we could come to an >> understanding that was rooted in the C/C++ language definitions (the >> standard >> documents) but I suppose I'm not able to explain things in a manner that >> you >> agree with. > > Don't worry, no one else can either. > > Yours was a detailed and patient attempt and I'm sure those willing to > learn would have learned a great deal form your postings. > I'm sure Thomas is a very knowledgeable programmer , in fact he must be if he has written compilers and stuff. One thing about Thomas' debate is that he did not put himself across as definately correct and anyone who disagreed with him to be incorrect. I was allowed to disagree with him without being incorrect. There is a problem with inconsistency in the terminology used the C++ standards. For example the word "contains" . (1) An object of array type, which nobody around can even acknowledge , is described as some object that "contains" sub objects of element types. I can understand this *concept* sure but there is no physical object in memory that contains sub-objects. (2) An object(of class type) does not contain member functions. LOL This must be a joke because an array object can "contain" sub objects , as a concept but an object(of class type) cannot "contain" memeber function, as a concept. The problem is that people can interpret the standards in different ways, and when the majority of people in a given group come to a consensus about the interpreted meaning, that is the defined meaning. But a technical standard should define what it is written to define , not a clique of people who have a common concencus of its interpretation.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 10:31 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <201106011031592971-pete@versatilecodingcom> |
| In reply to | #6005 |
On 2011-06-01 10:22:11 -1000, Paul said: > > The problem is that people can interpret the standards in different > ways, and when the majority of people in a given group come to a > consensus about the interpreted meaning, that is the defined meaning. > But a technical standard should define what it is written to define , > not a clique of people who have a common concencus of its > interpretation. I look forward to seeing your rewrite of the C++ standard with all the problems you perceive fixed so that no reader could possibly interpret it differently from what you intended. When will it be available? -- Pete Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of "The Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference (www.petebecker.com/tr1book)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 22:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <zVxFp.43306$yI6.16828@newsfe06.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6007 |
"Pete Becker" <pete@versatilecoding.com> wrote in message news:201106011031592971-pete@versatilecodingcom... > On 2011-06-01 10:22:11 -1000, Paul said: >> >> The problem is that people can interpret the standards in different ways, >> and when the majority of people in a given group come to a consensus >> about the interpreted meaning, that is the defined meaning. >> But a technical standard should define what it is written to define , not >> a clique of people who have a common concencus of its interpretation. > > I look forward to seeing your rewrite of the C++ standard with all the > problems you perceive fixed so that no reader could possibly interpret it > differently from what you intended. When will it be available? > There is no need for this sarcasm, I fully appreciate the mammoth task of creating the C++ standard. But you cannot have it both ways, you want an array to be a non modifiable object of array type when we discuss pointers to arrays, but in other situations you want an array to be a sequence of objects. Also this object of array type is not clearly defined in the C++ standards. What exactly is this non modifiable object of array type, is it an object or is it a type? If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a region of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he same region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable. If its a type then you are saying that a pointer points to a type. Then this does not agree wtih , what I think is the generally accepted definiton of what is "pointed to", because a pointer points to an object(or a location) not a type.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 09:28 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <94np71F12lU11@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #6016 |
On 06/ 2/11 09:10 AM, Paul wrote:
>
> If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a region
> of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he same
> region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable.
Consider:
struct X { mutable int n; };
int main()
{
const X x1 = {0};
X x2 = {1};
x1 = x2; // Error, x1 isn't modifiable.
x1.n = x2.n; // OK, x1.n is.
}
Are there two instances of x1?
--
Ian Collins
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 22:59 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <FDyFp.14945$8_2.11501@newsfe17.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6019 |
"Ian Collins" <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:94np71F12lU11@mid.individual.net...
> On 06/ 2/11 09:10 AM, Paul wrote:
>>
>> If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a
>> region
>> of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he
>> same
>> region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable.
>
> Consider:
>
> struct X { mutable int n; };
>
> int main()
> {
> const X x1 = {0};
> X x2 = {1};
>
> x1 = x2; // Error, x1 isn't modifiable.
> x1.n = x2.n; // OK, x1.n is.
> }
>
> Are there two instances of x1?
>
When you modify x1.n you also modify x1.
x1 has ben modified so how can you say its a non modifable object.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 15:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b12da5e7-c40d-4926-8311-74b4d999ecdd@s16g2000prf.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6030 |
On Jun 1, 2:59 pm, "Paul" <pchris...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "Ian Collins" <ian-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:94np71F12lU11@mid.individual.net...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On 06/ 2/11 09:10 AM, Paul wrote:
>
> >> If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a
> >> region
> >> of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he
> >> same
> >> region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable.
>
> > Consider:
>
> > struct X { mutable int n; };
>
> > int main()
> > {
> > const X x1 = {0};
> > X x2 = {1};
>
> > x1 = x2; // Error, x1 isn't modifiable.
> > x1.n = x2.n; // OK, x1.n is.
> > }
>
> > Are there two instances of x1?
>
> When you modify x1.n you also modify x1.
> x1 has ben modified so how can you say its a non modifable object.
It's easy. Consider:
int x = 0;
int const& y = x;
We say that "y" is non-modifiable. That is, you cannot modify the
object referred to by "y" through the expression "y". However, you can
modify the object referred to by "y" through other expressions, such
as "x". Ex:
x = 1;
There. I just modified "y" when "y" is non-modifiable.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 23:35 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <w8zFp.31144$El6.14313@newsfe21.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6032 |
"Joshua Maurice" <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:b12da5e7-c40d-4926-8311-74b4d999ecdd@s16g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
On Jun 1, 2:59 pm, "Paul" <pchris...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "Ian Collins" <ian-n...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a
> >> region
> >> of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he
> >> same
> >> region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable.
>
> > Consider:
>
> > struct X { mutable int n; };
>
> > int main()
> > {
> > const X x1 = {0};
> > X x2 = {1};
>
> > x1 = x2; // Error, x1 isn't modifiable.
> > x1.n = x2.n; // OK, x1.n is.
> > }
>
> > Are there two instances of x1?
>
> When you modify x1.n you also modify x1.
> x1 has ben modified so how can you say its a non modifable object.
--It's easy. Consider:
-- int x = 0;
-- int const& y = x;
--We say that "y" is non-modifiable. That is, you cannot modify the
--object referred to by "y" through the expression "y". However, you can
--modify the object referred to by "y" through other expressions, such
--as "x". Ex:
-- x = 1;
--There. I just modified "y" when "y" is non-modifiable.
'y' is a reference , you did not modify 'y'. To modify 'y' you would need to
make it reference another object.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 10:51 +1200 |
| Message-ID | <94nu2mF12lU15@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #6030 |
On 06/ 2/11 09:59 AM, Paul wrote:
>
> "Ian Collins"<ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:94np71F12lU11@mid.individual.net...
>> On 06/ 2/11 09:10 AM, Paul wrote:
>>>
>>> If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a
>>> region
>>> of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he
>>> same
>>> region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable.
>>
>> Consider:
>>
>> struct X { mutable int n; };
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>> const X x1 = {0};
>> X x2 = {1};
>>
>> x1 = x2; // Error, x1 isn't modifiable.
>> x1.n = x2.n; // OK, x1.n is.
>> }
>>
>> Are there two instances of x1?
>>
> When you modify x1.n you also modify x1.
> x1 has ben modified so how can you say its a non modifable object.
Is this clearer?
class X
{
X& operator=(const X&);
public:
int n;
};
int main()
{
X x1 = {0};
X x2 = {1};
x1 = x2;
x1.n = x2.n;
}
--
Ian Collins
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 00:28 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <1XzFp.47694$7H.17816@newsfe08.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6049 |
"Ian Collins" <ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:94nu2mF12lU15@mid.individual.net...
> On 06/ 2/11 09:59 AM, Paul wrote:
>>
>> "Ian Collins"<ian-news@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:94np71F12lU11@mid.individual.net...
>>> On 06/ 2/11 09:10 AM, Paul wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a
>>>> region
>>>> of storage, so where is this object stored? It cannot be stored int he
>>>> same
>>>> region as its elements because that region of storage is modifiable.
>>>
>>> Consider:
>>>
>>> struct X { mutable int n; };
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>> const X x1 = {0};
>>> X x2 = {1};
>>>
>>> x1 = x2; // Error, x1 isn't modifiable.
>>> x1.n = x2.n; // OK, x1.n is.
>>> }
>>>
>>> Are there two instances of x1?
>>>
>> When you modify x1.n you also modify x1.
>> x1 has ben modified so how can you say its a non modifable object.
>
> Is this clearer?
>
> class X
> {
> X& operator=(const X&);
>
> public:
>
> int n;
> };
>
> int main()
> {
> X x1 = {0};
> X x2 = {1};
>
> x1 = x2;
> x1.n = x2.n;
> }
>
> --
If an object is region of sotrage, and that object is non modifiable then
you cannot modify that region of storage.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 16:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ffe8afb0-e264-4e01-8e2c-8ac8ae521c46@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6053 |
On Jun 1, 4:28 pm, "Paul" <pchris...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > If an object is region of sotrage, and that object is non modifiable then > you cannot modify that region of storage. Incorrect. At least in this particular case, this is incorrect. That is not what is meant by your citation of the standard which says that array objects are not modifiable. If you want to call that a bug in the standard, so be it.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 09:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <ltHFp.46508$Am5.11427@newsfe05.ams2> |
| In reply to | #6056 |
"Joshua Maurice" <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> wrote in message news:ffe8afb0-e264-4e01-8e2c-8ac8ae521c46@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com... On Jun 1, 4:28 pm, "Paul" <pchris...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > If an object is region of sotrage, and that object is non modifiable then > you cannot modify that region of storage. --Incorrect. At least in this particular case, this is incorrect. That --is not what is meant by your citation of the standard which says that --array objects are not modifiable. If you want to call that a bug in --the standard, so be it. So basically you are saying that the standard is a waste of time because the text in it is incorrect? Also the text I posted a link to, by Bjarne Stroustrup, is incorrect therefore not worth reading. The C FAQ's are also incorrect. So basically almost all literature on this subject, which I have considered to be a good source, is actually incorrect and not worth reading? The only literature on C++ that seems to be acceptable to this community are the parts of the standards that has text written in such a way that it can be manipulated to mean whatever you want it to mean.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 01:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <74b6158d-7c01-4e37-afb2-0f17c46cb448@e17g2000prj.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6074 |
On Jun 2, 1:03 am, "Paul" <pchris...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > "Joshua Maurice" <joshuamaur...@gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:ffe8afb0-e264-4e01-8e2c-8ac8ae521c46@l2g2000prg.googlegroups.com... > On Jun 1, 4:28 pm, "Paul" <pchris...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > > > If an object is region of sotrage, and that object is non modifiable then > > you cannot modify that region of storage. > > --Incorrect. At least in this particular case, this is incorrect. That > --is not what is meant by your citation of the standard which says that > --array objects are not modifiable. If you want to call that a bug in > --the standard, so be it. > > So basically you are saying that the standard is a waste of time because the > text in it is incorrect? > Also the text I posted a link to, by Bjarne Stroustrup, is incorrect > therefore not worth reading. > The C FAQ's are also incorrect. > > So basically almost all literature on this subject, which I have considered > to be a good source, is actually incorrect and not worth reading? > > The only literature on C++ that seems to be acceptable to this community are > the parts of the standards that has text written in such a way that it can > be manipulated to mean whatever you want it to mean. I do not know to dissuade someone from deep seated delusions, persecution complexes, and conspiracy theories. This is a common problem I encounter in some of my discussions on other topics, and I have not found a solution. All I can say is that you have a horribly skewed perception of reality. What would take to convince you? A notarized letter signed by all the members of the standards committee and a representative from every major compiler writer? If you're at all reasonable, you have to ask yourself the question "What if I'm wrong? What would it take to change my mind?". So, what is it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Miles Bader <miles@gnu.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 17:31 +0900 |
| Message-ID | <buotyc84otb.fsf@dhlpc061.dev.necel.com> |
| In reply to | #6076 |
Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> writes:
> I do not know to dissuade someone from deep seated delusions,
> persecution complexes, and conspiracy theories. This is a common
> problem I encounter in some of my discussions on other topics, and I
> have not found a solution. All I can say is that you have a horribly
> skewed perception of reality.
So do you think paul is a troll, or a netkook?
I know, it's often hard to tell the difference, but I'm thinking a troll
would have gotten bored by now...
-miles
--
[|nurgle|] ddt- demonic? so quake will have an evil kinda setting? one that
will make every christian in the world foamm at the mouth?
[iddt] nurg, that's the goal
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-02 01:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <06628a90-db37-4c96-812c-52ea0c289f1b@34g2000pru.googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #6077 |
On Jun 2, 1:31 am, Miles Bader <mi...@gnu.org> wrote: > Joshua Maurice <joshuamaur...@gmail.com> writes: > > I do not know to dissuade someone from deep seated delusions, > > persecution complexes, and conspiracy theories. This is a common > > problem I encounter in some of my discussions on other topics, and I > > have not found a solution. All I can say is that you have a horribly > > skewed perception of reality. > > So do you think paul is a troll, or a netkook? > > I know, it's often hard to tell the difference, but I'm thinking a troll > would have gotten bored by now... I think he's for serious. As you said, it's hard to know for sure, but that's just my guess. Paul's beliefs have enough grounding in reality that I can see as plausible. Also his antics are too similar to someone else I used to be friends with, whom I know is not a troll.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Pete Becker <pete@versatilecoding.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2011-06-01 11:28 -1000 |
| Message-ID | <2011060111285351246-pete@versatilecodingcom> |
| In reply to | #6016 |
On 2011-06-01 11:10:50 -1000, Paul said: > "Pete Becker" <pete@versatilecoding.com> wrote in message > news:201106011031592971-pete@versatilecodingcom... >> On 2011-06-01 10:22:11 -1000, Paul said: >>> >>> The problem is that people can interpret the standards in different >>> ways, and when the majority of people in a given group come to a >>> consensus about the interpreted meaning, that is the defined meaning. >>> But a technical standard should define what it is written to define , >>> not a clique of people who have a common concencus of its >>> interpretation. >> >> I look forward to seeing your rewrite of the C++ standard with all the >> problems you perceive fixed so that no reader could possibly interpret >> it differently from what you intended. When will it be available? >> > There is no need for this sarcasm, I fully appreciate the mammoth task > of creating the C++ standard. > > But you cannot have it both ways, you want an array to be a non > modifiable object of array type when we discuss pointers to arrays, but > in other situations you want an array to be a sequence of objects. The two are not inherently inconsistent. And when you see potential conflicts in the way things are described you can either proclaim that they are irreconcilable and anyone trying to reconcile them is an idiot, or you can look for a way to read them that makes them consistent; the latter may require accepting an interpretation that's different from your preconceived notions. > Also this object of array type is not clearly defined in the C++ standards. > What exactly is this non modifiable object of array type, is it an > object or is it a type? You're kidding, right? A *non modifiable object* is an object. > > If its an object then , as defined in the standards, an object is a > region of storage, so where is this object stored? Wherever the compiler puts it. > It cannot be stored int he same region as its elements because that > region of storage is modifiable. int arr[5]; int arr0[5]; arr = arr0; // error: arr is not a modifiable object arr[0] = 3; // Ok: array element is modifiable -- Pete Roundhouse Consulting, Ltd. (www.versatilecoding.com) Author of "The Standard C++ Library Extensions: a Tutorial and Reference (www.petebecker.com/tr1book)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 10 of 21 — ← Prev page 1 … 8 9 [10] 11 12 … 21 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++
csiph-web