Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array |
| Date | 2011-09-15 13:46 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <slrn3vfsj740ea.iu1.ike@sverige.freeshell.org> (permalink) |
| References | <285449fe-33f9-4c81-893d-1d9349da0e95@x11g2000prb.googlegroups.com> <0.043e10b933bc7ff0fade.20110914144111BST.87sjnzz1fs.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <70593967-7007-4f11-8cc6-299130de8451@24g2000yqr.googlegroups.com> <0.e3a2ad104ce357e0d1d6.20110915105419BST.87aaa6yvuc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <3d340062-c7f4-46d8-8cce-0984d6db9096@v18g2000yqj.googlegroups.com> |
On 2011-09-15, Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> wrote:
> 1. when we use %p to print the pointer, but the argument is not
> explicitly converted, will it implicitly be converted to (void *)
> type?
No.
> 2. Why the equal pointers will print differently? It's machine
> dependent or anything else? Can we say that, two pointers must be
> equal if they are printed the same.
Imagine a cpu architecture where pointers are represented by a pair
(base,offset) where the effective memory address is obtained by
address = 16 * base + offset
The pointer (2,25) represents effective memory address 16 * 2 * 25 = 57 .
The pointer (3,9) represents effective memory address 16 * 3 + 9 = 57 .
These two pointers could print differently (say, "2:25" vs. "3:9") but
compare equal (57 vs. 57).
> 3. In my previous post. If I change my code:
> printf("the address of A+1: %p\n", (void *)A+1); // 3'
> printf("the address of &A+1: %p\n", (void *)&A+1); // 4'
Beware: (void *)A+1 is parsed as ((void *)A) + 1 which is
not correct C (one cannot perform arithmetic on a pointer to void)
although gcc will probably accept it as an extension.
You probably meant (void *) (A+1)
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-14 06:12 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-14 14:41 +0100
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Paul N <gw7rib@aol.com> - 2011-09-14 14:15 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> - 2011-09-14 19:25 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-15 10:54 +0100
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 05:36 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Ike Naar <ike@sverige.freeshell.org> - 2011-09-15 13:46 +0000
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-09-15 14:48 +0100
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-15 10:28 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 18:23 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-16 12:58 +0100
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-16 08:03 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-09-16 13:09 +0100
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-16 12:05 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2011-09-16 19:35 +0000
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Peter Nilsson <airia@acay.com.au> - 2011-09-19 15:45 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-19 17:47 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-15 10:21 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 05:22 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-15 10:23 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-09-15 15:26 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 18:14 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-16 02:09 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-16 08:39 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array pete <pfiland@mindspring.com> - 2011-09-16 18:08 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Bart van Ingen Schenau <bart@ingen.ddns.info> - 2011-09-16 16:38 +0200
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array cri@tiac.net (Richard Harter) - 2011-09-16 22:04 +0000
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 18:08 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2011-09-16 13:12 +0100
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-16 08:30 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-15 11:51 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-15 18:13 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-15 21:18 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Stanley Rice <heconghui@gmail.com> - 2011-09-16 05:37 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2011-09-16 09:46 -0400
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2011-09-16 12:08 -0700
Re: Address of array && address of pointer to array Nobody <nobody@nowhere.com> - 2011-09-16 13:20 +0100
csiph-web