Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Arrays Vs Pointers |
| Date | 2012-02-20 15:19 -0800 |
| Organization | None to speak of |
| Message-ID | <lnbootcctn.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> (permalink) |
| References | <jgs51h$hhm$1@speranza.aioe.org> <slrnjk1qug.1m5e.willem@toad.stack.nl> <lnfwe6efr8.fsf@nuthaus.mib.org> <4F42C9FB.2597@mindspring.com> |
pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> writes:
> Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> writes:
>> > peter wrote:
>> > ) I am currently exploring the world of pointers and have encounter some
>> > ) inconsistent information regarding the best way to reference an
>> > ) array: array[1] OR *(array +1).
>> > )
>> > ) One book says that you should not use the syntax array[1] because
>> > ) of performance reason.
>> >
>> > That book is completely and utterly wrong.
>> > In C, "array[index]" is *exactly the same* as "*(array + index)"
>> > I would go so far as to call it syntactic sugar.
>> > Hell, it's even commutative. "array[index]" means the same as "index[array]" !
>> [...]
>>
>> Yes, but I doubt that that's what the book actually said.
>
> Teach Yourself C,
> by Herbert Schildt, copyright 1990,
> Chapter 6.3, Use Pointers With Arrays,
> page 197:
>
> For somewhat complex reasons,
> a C compiler will generally create faster executable code
> for an expression such as
>
> *(p+3)
>
> than it will for the comparable array index
>
> p[3]
Had I known it was one of Schildt's books, I wouldn't have assumed
that it said something sensible. (Do we know that that's the book to
which peter was referring?)
Willem is right: the book is completely and utterly wrong.
There's probably a valid point somewhere in the vicinity of what
Schildt wrote (as I discussed upthread), but Schildt missed it.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) kst-u@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
Will write code for food.
"We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this."
-- Antony Jay and Jonathan Lynn, "Yes Minister"
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Arrays Vs Pointers peter <pc722@nospam.mail.com.br> - 2012-02-07 21:28 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers William Ahern <william@wilbur.25thandClement.com> - 2012-02-07 13:50 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-07 17:13 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Stephen Sprunk <stephen@sprunk.org> - 2012-02-07 16:38 -0600
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-02-07 23:09 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-07 14:41 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-02-07 23:07 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-07 19:14 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 18:21 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-07 16:25 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 20:31 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> - 2012-02-07 23:36 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-07 16:26 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-07 16:24 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2012-02-07 14:55 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Shao Miller <sha0.miller@gmail.com> - 2012-02-07 18:11 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2012-02-08 16:06 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2012-02-08 23:25 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers John Bode <jfbode1029@gmail.com> - 2012-02-09 05:34 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2012-02-10 01:04 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Nick Keighley <nick_keighley_nospam@hotmail.com> - 2012-02-09 00:20 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers 88888 Dihedral <dihedral88888@googlemail.com> - 2012-02-09 23:42 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-02-10 01:20 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers David Thompson <dave.thompson2@verizon.net> - 2012-02-18 23:12 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2012-02-19 05:53 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2012-02-19 18:54 +0100
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-02-19 18:51 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2012-02-19 21:29 +0100
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Markus Wichmann <nullplan@gmx.net> - 2012-02-20 11:24 +0100
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2012-02-21 01:51 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-02-19 12:32 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-19 12:21 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Willem <willem@toad.stack.nl> - 2012-02-19 21:00 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2012-02-19 21:42 +0000
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2012-02-20 17:32 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2012-02-20 17:56 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-20 15:19 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-20 16:35 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2012-02-20 22:53 -0500
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2012-02-20 21:16 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers Richard Sanders <lnr729@gmail.com> - 2012-02-21 00:26 -0800
Re: Arrays Vs Pointers pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2012-02-21 11:46 -0500
csiph-web