Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: Difference between these pointer syntaxes Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2016 19:10:36 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 24 Message-ID: References: <4628cd2d-9333-4be6-943a-eb593c5c4c12@googlegroups.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="945944de09706c9b4e29b53c9d2efdc2"; logging-data="25327"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+SXanmg6eRBYc2Y/NP8UpO" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:uSti0Qc3mbnq10Z+oo/eUm1yhKk= sha1:Qjzmr/8mI8LWo24m8AiozA6VwIU= Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.c:92439 BartC writes: > On 18/08/2016 02:01, Keith Thompson wrote: [...] >> But since you refuse to understand how C arrays actually work, I won't >> bother discussing with you how they *could* work in some C-like >> language. > > Can you please stop treating me like a cretin. (BTW I've been designing > and implementing C-like languages for 35 years.) > > I get how C arrays work. What I hadn't appreciated until now was the > degree by which they have adversely affected the language. (I thought it > was bad; it's actually worse.) If you still believe that C arrays are really pointers, you don't understand C arrays. [...] -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org Working, but not speaking, for JetHead Development, Inc. "We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this." -- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"