Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c > #148634 > unrolled thread
| Started by | T <T@invalid.invalid> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-12-31 20:08 -0800 |
| Last post | 2020-01-21 16:44 +0100 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 193 — 20 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c
Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? T <T@invalid.invalid> - 2019-12-31 20:08 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Paul <nospam@needed.invalid> - 2019-12-31 23:50 -0500
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 03:28 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 03:49 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 13:26 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 04:34 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 13:56 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 05:04 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 14:18 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-01 13:21 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 14:26 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-01 13:19 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 14:24 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-01 14:56 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 16:06 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-01 15:44 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 16:54 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 08:07 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2020-01-01 14:19 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-01 15:28 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> - 2020-01-02 11:06 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-02 10:19 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2020-01-02 13:33 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-02 13:55 +0000
Raku (Was: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1?) gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2020-01-02 14:48 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-02 15:03 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-02 06:18 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? m.nasim85@gmail.com - 2020-01-02 01:26 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? F Russell <fr@random.info> - 2020-01-05 19:32 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-05 12:25 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? F Russell <fr@random.info> - 2020-01-07 00:33 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 01:11 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-06 22:32 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 10:08 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 06:24 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 06:30 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 06:42 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 12:47 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 21:20 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2020-01-07 21:53 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 14:01 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 14:22 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 22:31 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-08 00:27 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-08 08:13 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? chad <cdalten@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 06:33 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 06:38 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 06:49 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 16:38 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 10:31 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 10:44 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-07 19:54 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-01-11 10:24 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-11 14:23 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> - 2020-01-21 04:21 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-21 05:06 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 10:59 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 19:21 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 11:36 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Barry Schwarz <schwarzb@delq.com> - 2020-01-06 18:02 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-07 10:55 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-06 23:34 -0500
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-01-06 22:30 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2020-01-05 16:30 -0500
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-06 02:07 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-06 07:57 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 08:03 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 08:11 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2020-01-07 10:09 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 11:12 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 11:09 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 13:45 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 13:06 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 14:14 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-07 16:27 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 17:53 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 08:55 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-01-07 05:19 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-11 19:11 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-11 19:09 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-11 20:18 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-11 20:00 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 07:02 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 00:32 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 09:38 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 01:09 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 10:48 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 01:57 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 11:02 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 02:09 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 12:45 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 03:54 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 13:13 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 04:35 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 13:38 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 04:44 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 13:49 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 04:59 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 14:03 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 05:21 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 14:35 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 05:46 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 15:11 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 06:41 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 16:15 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 08:11 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 08:19 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 17:42 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 17:40 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 09:04 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 18:05 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 09:13 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 18:16 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 09:25 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 18:26 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 09:21 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 18:25 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 09:31 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 18:33 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-12 13:21 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-13 09:16 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 04:28 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 13:36 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2020-01-13 04:39 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-13 15:22 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-13 05:10 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 15:10 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> - 2020-01-13 07:31 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 16:34 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 06:59 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 16:32 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 17:17 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 18:13 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 09:19 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 18:22 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 09:29 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 18:34 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 09:40 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 18:42 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 09:56 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 19:19 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 10:21 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 19:25 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 10:46 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 08:02 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-15 01:04 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-15 01:25 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-15 06:37 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-15 10:49 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-02-04 01:15 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Siri Cruise <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2020-02-04 01:48 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2020-02-04 02:29 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-02-04 03:05 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-02-04 04:07 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-02-04 04:59 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 08:51 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-13 15:19 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 06:47 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 06:51 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 09:35 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-13 21:48 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 12:54 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-13 13:38 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Malcolm McLean <malcolm.arthur.mclean@gmail.com> - 2020-01-14 02:30 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-14 02:40 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-14 02:47 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-14 03:52 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-14 04:00 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> - 2020-01-14 14:20 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 02:21 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 12:50 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 04:14 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-12 14:23 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 16:16 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 08:13 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 17:43 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-12 17:42 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 18:43 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-12 18:04 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 19:31 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-12 21:18 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 13:53 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 19:36 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bart <bc@freeuk.com> - 2020-01-12 20:56 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 10:04 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 02:05 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 12:43 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 03:46 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 12:51 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 03:58 -0800
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-12 13:14 +0100
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) - 2020-01-07 13:03 +0000
Re: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2020-01-21 16:44 +0100
Page 2 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 10 Next page →
| From | Dan Purgert <dan@djph.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 11:06 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <slrnr0rjl3.221.dan@djph.net> |
| In reply to | #148649 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 Bonita Montero wrote: >>> C is just a good language to learn lowlevel systems-programming. >>> In practice it should be mostly abandonned. > >> I'm working on abandoning it for ASM. I ... might be doing things >> wrong. :) > > Ok, C is a better choice then. > But the gap between Asm and C isn't so large as between C and C++. I kind of meant it to be a bit of a joke. Probably doesn't come across that well, what with me not posting here often. ( "better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool" and all that). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEzBAEBCAAdFiEEBcqaUD8uEzVNxUrujhHd8xJ5ooEFAl4NzqIACgkQjhHd8xJ5 ooFt7ggAqCp/LvEGaRJQgDjdqXfmpdXlOYgUuZ+R/Bwby1E1ICP1DcFdxnw7HNOi WJcBeTn5f7nPMETFSlxNMsIX8Gt3fCJKXSqGM6gLNv/3q+LVBbbdGC7/WdjQmXWl BuRfPKXeVbc8agLtbEg9l8+GCfg3RY47GbV4YxRMRlkIRbTZCgNi56XuEy2AvTYz M10uIkGgvS9cBMMyw4aLfJBgOC4oVInJdLjYbkjQ+PH5xSeXz8byM0iorf7U+Y4n 3VM8UldE1K6LZq0tBNB4beYXnN4UsfucO3ZefIYFwREb1sCJ2Rym1WA1LAnhxk7I K8kfZy1IJfy+0e9TJbiA6ki16jjvRw== =jaPn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- |_|O|_| |_|_|O| Github: https://github.com/dpurgert |O|O|O| PGP: 05CA 9A50 3F2E 1335 4DC5 4AEE 8E11 DDF3 1279 A281
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 10:19 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qukcil$fub$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #148634 |
On 01/01/2020 05:08, T wrote: > Hi C Guys, > > Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop > me?), but does the default index for C arrays start > at zero or one? > > Many thanks, > -T While this is a good place to ask questions about C (if you ignore the few posters who would rather argue about who is being the biggest troll), it sounds like you would do a lot better if you got hold of a reasonable C tutorial or book. You are missing too many fundamental points about how the language works - things that you need to know to have a grounding in the language, and which will be in any C tutorial With some languages, you can get by quite well by looking at examples, and just trying things out. I don't think C is such a language.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 13:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qukrfr$70n$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #148669 |
In article <qukcil$fub$1@dont-email.me>, David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >On 01/01/2020 05:08, T wrote: >> Hi C Guys, >> >> Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop >> me?), but does the default index for C arrays start >> at zero or one? >> >> Many thanks, >> -T > >While this is a good place to ask questions about C (if you ignore the >few posters who would rather argue about who is being the biggest >troll), it sounds like you would do a lot better if you got hold of a >reasonable C tutorial or book. You are missing too many fundamental >points about how the language works - things that you need to know to >have a grounding in the language, and which will be in any C tutorial In all seriousness, I think "T" has made it clear that he has no interest in learning C. He is, as he proudly claims at any and every opportunity, a Perl6 programmer and Perl6 (*) it shall ever be. His only interest in C is in terms of interfacing to it from other languages. I assume this latest question is, in reality, in that category. So, really, his questions are about ABIs, not about C. It is just that most of this stuff is documented in terms of C. I'm familiar with this aspect of things, in that I often have read up on functions on MSDN that are couched in C terms, when I am trying to call those functions from my favorite Windows scripting language. (*) Although, he may have recently also shown some interest in something called "Raku", whatever that may be. BTW, I assume that the makers of a certain streaming video device may soon be sikking their lawyers on whoever came up with that name. -- So to cure the problem of arrogant incompetent rich people we should turn the government over to an arrogant incompetent trust fund billionaire who knows nothing about government and who has never held a job in his entire spoiled life?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 13:55 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <NDmPF.315597$hB1.39119@fx27.am4> |
| In reply to | #148678 |
On 02/01/2020 13:33, Kenny McCormack wrote: > In article <qukcil$fub$1@dont-email.me>, > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> On 01/01/2020 05:08, T wrote: >>> Hi C Guys, >>> >>> Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop >>> me?), but does the default index for C arrays start >>> at zero or one? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> -T >> >> While this is a good place to ask questions about C (if you ignore the >> few posters who would rather argue about who is being the biggest >> troll), it sounds like you would do a lot better if you got hold of a >> reasonable C tutorial or book. You are missing too many fundamental >> points about how the language works - things that you need to know to >> have a grounding in the language, and which will be in any C tutorial > > In all seriousness, I think "T" has made it clear that he has no interest > in learning C. He is, as he proudly claims at any and every opportunity, a > Perl6 programmer and Perl6 (*) it shall ever be. His only interest in C is > in terms of interfacing to it from other languages. (Same as mine now that I've dropped C code generation for good.) I assume this latest > question is, in reality, in that category. > > So, really, his questions are about ABIs, not about C. I don't think the native interface he's trying to use goes as deep as the ABI. It just doesn't seem mature enough to properly work. It is just that > most of this stuff is documented in terms of C. I'm familiar with this > aspect of things, in that I often have read up on functions on MSDN that > are couched in C terms, when I am trying to call those functions from my > favorite Windows scripting language. > > (*) Although, he may have recently also shown some interest in something > called "Raku", whatever that may be. BTW, I assume that the makers of a > certain streaming video device may soon be sikking their lawyers on whoever > came up with that name. Raku is the new name for Perl 6. (That streaming device seems to be called 'Roku', although that must be a common mixup as Google corrects 'raku streaming...' to 'roku'.)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 14:48 +0000 |
| Subject | Raku (Was: Do "C" arrays start a 0 or 1?) |
| Message-ID | <qukvr7$9sm$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #148680 |
In article <NDmPF.315597$hB1.39119@fx27.am4>, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
...
>> (*) Although, he may have recently also shown some interest in something
>> called "Raku", whatever that may be. BTW, I assume that the makers of a
>> certain streaming video device may soon be sikking their lawyers on whoever
>> came up with that name.
>
>Raku is the new name for Perl 6.
Yeah. Now I remember. Obvious question: Why?
>(That streaming device seems to be called 'Roku', although that must be
>a common mixup as Google corrects 'raku streaming...' to 'roku'.)
It is close enough that lawyers may get involved.
I'm thinking of opening a hamburger chain called MacDonalds. Yeah, that
should be OK.
Incidentally, Roku is the Japanese word for six.
--
They say compassion is a virtue, but I don't have the time!
- David Byrne -
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 15:03 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qukt7i$6ba$1@dont-email.me> |
| In reply to | #148678 |
On 02/01/2020 14:33, Kenny McCormack wrote: > In article <qukcil$fub$1@dont-email.me>, > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: >> On 01/01/2020 05:08, T wrote: >>> Hi C Guys, >>> >>> Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop >>> me?), but does the default index for C arrays start >>> at zero or one? >>> >>> Many thanks, >>> -T >> >> While this is a good place to ask questions about C (if you ignore the >> few posters who would rather argue about who is being the biggest >> troll), it sounds like you would do a lot better if you got hold of a >> reasonable C tutorial or book. You are missing too many fundamental >> points about how the language works - things that you need to know to >> have a grounding in the language, and which will be in any C tutorial > > In all seriousness, I think "T" has made it clear that he has no interest > in learning C. He is, as he proudly claims at any and every opportunity, a > Perl6 programmer and Perl6 (*) it shall ever be. His only interest in C is > in terms of interfacing to it from other languages. I assume this latest > question is, in reality, in that category. > > So, really, his questions are about ABIs, not about C. It is just that > most of this stuff is documented in terms of C. I'm familiar with this > aspect of things, in that I often have read up on functions on MSDN that > are couched in C terms, when I am trying to call those functions from my > favorite Windows scripting language. Your standards are slipping, Kenny - those are all good points :-) I still think doing some tutorials or reading a basic C book would help him out, and save him a lot of time in the long run. > > (*) Although, he may have recently also shown some interest in something > called "Raku", whatever that may be. BTW, I assume that the makers of a > certain streaming video device may soon be sikking their lawyers on whoever > came up with that name. >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 06:18 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4eb25b0b-a604-4609-9ffd-50ad283fe24c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #148681 |
W dniu czwartek, 2 stycznia 2020 15:03:37 UTC+1 użytkownik David Brown napisał: > On 02/01/2020 14:33, Kenny McCormack wrote: > > In article <qukcil$fub$1@dont-email.me>, > > David Brown <david.brown@hesbynett.no> wrote: > >> On 01/01/2020 05:08, T wrote: > >>> Hi C Guys, > >>> > >>> Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop > >>> me?), but does the default index for C arrays start > >>> at zero or one? > >>> > >>> Many thanks, > >>> -T > >> > >> While this is a good place to ask questions about C (if you ignore the > >> few posters who would rather argue about who is being the biggest > >> troll), it sounds like you would do a lot better if you got hold of a > >> reasonable C tutorial or book. You are missing too many fundamental > >> points about how the language works - things that you need to know to > >> have a grounding in the language, and which will be in any C tutorial > > > > In all seriousness, I think "T" has made it clear that he has no interest > > in learning C. He is, as he proudly claims at any and every opportunity, a > > Perl6 programmer and Perl6 (*) it shall ever be. His only interest in C is > > in terms of interfacing to it from other languages. I assume this latest > > question is, in reality, in that category. > > > > So, really, his questions are about ABIs, not about C. It is just that > > most of this stuff is documented in terms of C. I'm familiar with this > > aspect of things, in that I often have read up on functions on MSDN that > > are couched in C terms, when I am trying to call those functions from my > > favorite Windows scripting language. > > Your standards are slipping, Kenny - those are all good points :-) > > I still think doing some tutorials or reading a basic C book would help > him out, and save him a lot of time in the long run. > > > > > (*) Although, he may have recently also shown some interest in something > > called "Raku", whatever that may be. BTW, I assume that the makers of a > > certain streaming video device may soon be sikking their lawyers on whoever > > came up with that name. > > its all a meter of quantity (for example even questions who someone may google are sometimes worth stating - there is some advantage in stating it especially for asker, also it can bring no harm to a group (for example if i would like to learn javascript i could feel better having uenet group for that and being able to ask some questions - not becouse tutorials or reading bacascriot source is to hard to me but rather becouse it is boring with that attempt. discussion is better BUT finally it is all a metter of quantity as if someone will flod whole group with a big amount of noob questions it wouldnt be good (belive me i seen that back then )..this is just like those infamous bartc imaginary fights, when it was in acceptable amount it was okay when it become to make 200+ large threads over and over its overal income could be found as somewhat unfortunate finally you simply should whot this group is about, most fortunatelly it is to discus new things increase knowledge etc..rolling noob content or crazy content over and over is not the best quality content you could have there (but mostly if something becomes harmfull (or boring) depends on quantity imo) also this trolling things should b cut down..honestly using an usenet i discovered some strange truth ;c : anybody is a troll, honestly there is verey hard to be non troll totally in usenet (thogh some at lest are non trolls for some time, some other are trolls like all the time (becous of their implied stupidity) and obviouslyt this is annoying and its overally damn bad thing
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | m.nasim85@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-02 01:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <6c48259a-4aef-40a2-9e56-370eb1268868@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #148634 |
C arrays indexing starts from 0 C, C++, C#, J, Python all start from 0. if you found C programmers speaking about 1st element in array, they mean arr[0].
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | F Russell <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-05 19:32 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qutdl5023t9@news2.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #148634 |
On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 20:08:40 -0800, T wrote: > > Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop > me?), but does the default index for C arrays start > at zero or one? > In C, an array variable is simply a pointer to a memory location, and that location holds the first element of the array. It is thus natural to expect that the first element is *(array+0) which is the same as array[0]. To access the array elements, we can use this pointer to "hop" along the sequential list. For example, to access the 10th element we can use *(array+9). This increments the pointer by 9*stride_length + array so that we find the 10th element. Indeed, in C, the construction array[0] is the same as *(array+0), and array[9] is the same as *(array+9).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-05 12:25 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <87pnfxmz0i.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #148792 |
F Russell <fr@random.info> writes:
> On Tue, 31 Dec 2019 20:08:40 -0800, T wrote:
>> Not to ask to stupid a question (when does that stop
>> me?), but does the default index for C arrays start
>> at zero or one?
>
> In C, an array variable is simply a pointer to
> a memory location, and that location holds the
> first element of the array.
No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object.
The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated
as an array expression.
The most obvious example: given
int array_object[10];
the expression
sizeof array_object
yields the size of the array (10*sizeof (int)). If arrays were simply
pointers, it would yield the size of a pointer.
This is explained in section 6 of the comp.lang.c FAQ
<http://www.c-faq.com/>.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
[Note updated email address]
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | F Russell <fr@random.info> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 00:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qv0jl5085n@news1.newsguy.com> |
| In reply to | #148793 |
On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: > > No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object. > The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated > as an array expression. > That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act exactly like pointers. For example, according to the AMD64 calling convention, if an array name is passed as a function argument, the array name is actually stored in the RDI, RSI, etc. register as a 64-bit integer. I often pass array names as parameters to assembly language functions and the values in RDI, RSI, etc. will "point" directly to element #1 of the array. That is, they can be used directly as an address. If that's not a pointer then I don't know what is. E.g. vmovapd ymm0, [rdi] Move element #1 of the array (in this case a double value) into register ymm0. Here, RDI contains the address of the array passed by the calling program in a function with that array name as a parameter.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 01:11 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <PUQQF.727$BA5.461@fx21.am4> |
| In reply to | #148813 |
On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote:
> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>
>>
>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object.
>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated
>> as an array expression.
>>
>
> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act
> exactly like pointers.
C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a
block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that happening
in an expression (a proper expression not those special sizeof(A) and &A
operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to the first element:
int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints
int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints
int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints
Now try and evaluate the whole array:
A; // The whole array
B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array
(*C); // The whole array
But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the
result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static:
A:
resb 40
B:
resb 8
C:
resb 8
...
lea D0, [A] # (D0 is a 64-bit int register)
mov D0, [B]
mov D0, [C]
So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it just
loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring your
instruction to dereference that pointer.
As you can see however, array A actually exists as a 40-byte/10-element
sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your code needs to
initialise to point to a space that can contain a 40-byte/10-element array.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-06 22:32 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <874kx7n5dr.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> |
| In reply to | #148814 |
Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes:
> On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote:
>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object.
>>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated
>>> as an array expression.
>>
>> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act
>> exactly like pointers.
>
> C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a
> block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that
> happening in an expression (a proper expression not those special
> sizeof(A) and &A operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to
> the first element:
>
> int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints
> int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints
> int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints
>
> Now try and evaluate the whole array:
>
> A; // The whole array
> B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array
> (*C); // The whole array
>
> But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the
> result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static:
>
[snip]
>
> So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it
> just loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring
> your instruction to dereference that pointer.
>
> As you can see however, array A actually exists as a
> 40-byte/10-element sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your
> code needs to initialise to point to a space that can contain a
> 40-byte/10-element array.
As usual, you describe the semantics in a way designed to make it look
confusing rather than trying to help anyone understand it.
Yes, C's treatment of arrays and pointers can be confusing.
You're not helping.
--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
[Note updated email address]
Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 10:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <lMYQF.6301$5X1.3382@fx06.am4> |
| In reply to | #148822 |
On 07/01/2020 06:32, Keith Thompson wrote: > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote: >>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: >>>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object. >>>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated >>>> as an array expression. >>> >>> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act >>> exactly like pointers. >> >> C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a >> block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that >> happening in an expression (a proper expression not those special >> sizeof(A) and &A operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to >> the first element: >> >> int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints >> int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints >> int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints >> >> Now try and evaluate the whole array: >> >> A; // The whole array >> B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array >> (*C); // The whole array >> >> But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the >> result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static: >> > [snip] >> >> So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it >> just loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring >> your instruction to dereference that pointer. >> >> As you can see however, array A actually exists as a >> 40-byte/10-element sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your >> code needs to initialise to point to a space that can contain a >> 40-byte/10-element array. > > As usual, you describe the semantics in a way designed to make it look > confusing rather than trying to help anyone understand it. Less confusing that your explanation. I said that C will resort to deriving a pointer as soon as any attempt is made to load a full array value. This doesn't happen with sizeof because it's only interested in the type, not the value. And it doesn't happen with the address-of operator & because that stops C from attempting to load the value of anything that follows, not just arrays. > Yes, C's treatment of arrays and pointers can be confusing. > You're not helping. Regurgitating tracts of the C standard doesn't help either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 06:24 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2e2172e1-a6e4-4488-89e9-f93036b839c0@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #148827 |
W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 11:08:25 UTC+1 użytkownik Bart napisał: > On 07/01/2020 06:32, Keith Thompson wrote: > > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > >> On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote: > >>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: > >>>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object. > >>>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated > >>>> as an array expression. > >>> > >>> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act > >>> exactly like pointers. > >> > >> C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a > >> block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that > >> happening in an expression (a proper expression not those special > >> sizeof(A) and &A operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to > >> the first element: > >> > >> int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints > >> int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints > >> int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints > >> > >> Now try and evaluate the whole array: > >> > >> A; // The whole array > >> B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array > >> (*C); // The whole array > >> > >> But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the > >> result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static: > >> > > [snip] > >> > >> So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it > >> just loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring > >> your instruction to dereference that pointer. > >> > >> As you can see however, array A actually exists as a > >> 40-byte/10-element sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your > >> code needs to initialise to point to a space that can contain a > >> 40-byte/10-element array. > > > > As usual, you describe the semantics in a way designed to make it look > > confusing rather than trying to help anyone understand it. > > Less confusing that your explanation. > > I said that C will resort to deriving a pointer as soon as any attempt > is made to load a full array value. > youre wrong here in close or the seme type of being wrong as people who say array is a pointer what c will 'derive' (if use this word ) is nota pointer, it is and adress adress is quite different thing than pointer, adres for example may be only as immediate value in code section of assembly , or being crafted from some arithmetic and being calculete in register as final results, or some simply also may thing that it is something in a head of a programmer (though if you would like to use value it will need to be provided physically etc), but adress is nota a pointer, same as array is not a pointer ;c (and mostly code tjhat uses arrays need only an edresses not pointers) > This doesn't happen with sizeof because it's only interested in the > type, not the value. And it doesn't happen with the address-of operator > & because that stops C from attempting to load the value of anything > that follows, not just arrays. > > > Yes, C's treatment of arrays and pointers can be confusing. > > You're not helping. > > Regurgitating tracts of the C standard doesn't help either.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 06:30 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <48cfbb55-b88d-442e-a48d-6d9eadd36184@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #148840 |
W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 15:24:37 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 11:08:25 UTC+1 użytkownik Bart napisał: > > On 07/01/2020 06:32, Keith Thompson wrote: > > > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > > >> On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote: > > >>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: > > >>>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object. > > >>>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated > > >>>> as an array expression. > > >>> > > >>> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act > > >>> exactly like pointers. > > >> > > >> C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a > > >> block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that > > >> happening in an expression (a proper expression not those special > > >> sizeof(A) and &A operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to > > >> the first element: > > >> > > >> int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints > > >> int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints > > >> int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints > > >> > > >> Now try and evaluate the whole array: > > >> > > >> A; // The whole array > > >> B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array > > >> (*C); // The whole array > > >> > > >> But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the > > >> result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static: > > >> > > > [snip] > > >> > > >> So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it > > >> just loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring > > >> your instruction to dereference that pointer. > > >> > > >> As you can see however, array A actually exists as a > > >> 40-byte/10-element sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your > > >> code needs to initialise to point to a space that can contain a > > >> 40-byte/10-element array. > > > > > > As usual, you describe the semantics in a way designed to make it look > > > confusing rather than trying to help anyone understand it. > > > > Less confusing that your explanation. > > > > I said that C will resort to deriving a pointer as soon as any attempt > > is made to load a full array value. > > > > > youre wrong here in close or the seme type of being wrong as people who say array is a pointer > > what c will 'derive' (if use this word ) > is nota pointer, it is and adress > > adress is quite different thing than pointer, adres for example may be only as immediate value in code section of assembly , or being crafted from some arithmetic and being calculete in register as final results, or some simply also may thing that it is something in a head of a programmer (though if you would like to use value it will need to be provided physically etc), but adress is nota a pointer, same as array is not a pointer ;c (and mostly code tjhat uses arrays need only an edresses not pointers) > > check back some of my post when i was writing that passing struct by-adress is a proper way Some x; foo(x); //by adress you totally not need a concept liek pointer here, as pointer is whet you in most cases dont need here (like changing its value etc like if you woyuld get foo(Some* x), now x is a pointer not and adress, than x++ and weird things like that, generally it is fault tu use pointer here ) ) what you need and what makes ciode more solid is adress here
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 06:42 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <68276be9-18ce-4e32-b675-5b1b07011109@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #148841 |
W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 15:30:14 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 15:24:37 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > > W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 11:08:25 UTC+1 użytkownik Bart napisał: > > > On 07/01/2020 06:32, Keith Thompson wrote: > > > > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > > > >> On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote: > > > >>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: > > > >>>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object. > > > >>>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated > > > >>>> as an array expression. > > > >>> > > > >>> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act > > > >>> exactly like pointers. > > > >> > > > >> C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a > > > >> block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that > > > >> happening in an expression (a proper expression not those special > > > >> sizeof(A) and &A operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to > > > >> the first element: > > > >> > > > >> int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints > > > >> int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints > > > >> int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints > > > >> > > > >> Now try and evaluate the whole array: > > > >> > > > >> A; // The whole array > > > >> B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array > > > >> (*C); // The whole array > > > >> > > > >> But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the > > > >> result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static: > > > >> > > > > [snip] > > > >> > > > >> So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it > > > >> just loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring > > > >> your instruction to dereference that pointer. > > > >> > > > >> As you can see however, array A actually exists as a > > > >> 40-byte/10-element sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your > > > >> code needs to initialise to point to a space that can contain a > > > >> 40-byte/10-element array. > > > > > > > > As usual, you describe the semantics in a way designed to make it look > > > > confusing rather than trying to help anyone understand it. > > > > > > Less confusing that your explanation. > > > > > > I said that C will resort to deriving a pointer as soon as any attempt > > > is made to load a full array value. > > > > > > > > > youre wrong here in close or the seme type of being wrong as people who say array is a pointer > > > > what c will 'derive' (if use this word ) > > is nota pointer, it is and adress > > > > adress is quite different thing than pointer, adres for example may be only as immediate value in code section of assembly , or being crafted from some arithmetic and being calculete in register as final results, or some simply also may thing that it is something in a head of a programmer (though if you would like to use value it will need to be provided physically etc), but adress is nota a pointer, same as array is not a pointer ;c (and mostly code tjhat uses arrays need only an edresses not pointers) > > > > > check back some of my post when i was writing that passing struct by-adress > is a proper way > > Some x; > > foo(x); //by adress > > you totally not need a concept liek pointer here, as pointer is whet you in most cases dont need here (like changing its value etc > like if you woyuld get foo(Some* x), > now x is a pointer not and adress, than x++ and weird things like that, generally it is fault tu use pointer here ) > > ) what you need and what makes ciode more solid is adress here i wrote on this quite fundamental things quite ago btw, i dont know 7 years ago ? maybe 6? (i also was writen on concept of pointers in c as being generally done bad way and overused, (like **x ***x ect have no sense) though i dont quite remember my final conclusions now)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | fir <profesor.fir@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 12:47 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <aba53cb9-d48c-4327-8715-2030117f5804@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #148845 |
W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 15:42:59 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 15:30:14 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > > W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 15:24:37 UTC+1 użytkownik fir napisał: > > > W dniu wtorek, 7 stycznia 2020 11:08:25 UTC+1 użytkownik Bart napisał: > > > > On 07/01/2020 06:32, Keith Thompson wrote: > > > > > Bart <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > > > > >> On 07/01/2020 00:33, F Russell wrote: > > > > >>> On Sun, 05 Jan 2020 12:25:33 -0800, Keith Thompson wrote: > > > > >>>> No, arrays are not pointers. An array variable holds an array object. > > > > >>>> The name of an array variable, in most but not all contexts, is treated > > > > >>>> as an array expression. > > > > >>> > > > > >>> That may be so, but for practical purposes they sure do act > > > > >>> exactly like pointers. > > > > >> > > > > >> C doesn't like treating arrays as actual arrays, eg. an int[10] as a > > > > >> block of 10 ints or 40 bytes. So at the faintest hint of that > > > > >> happening in an expression (a proper expression not those special > > > > >> sizeof(A) and &A operators), then it will instead yield a pointer to > > > > >> the first element: > > > > >> > > > > >> int A[10]; // A is an actual array of 10 ints > > > > >> int *B; // B is a pointer to the first of multiple ints > > > > >> int (*C)[10]; // C is a pointer to an array of 10 ints > > > > >> > > > > >> Now try and evaluate the whole array: > > > > >> > > > > >> A; // The whole array > > > > >> B; // A int pointer so can't access whole array > > > > >> (*C); // The whole array > > > > >> > > > > >> But this is the code generated in each case (evaluation just loads the > > > > >> result into a register then ignores it); A, B, C are all static: > > > > >> > > > > > [snip] > > > > >> > > > > >> So here, for A, it just loads the address of that array. For B, it > > > > >> just loads the pointer. But for C, it also loads the pointer, ignoring > > > > >> your instruction to dereference that pointer. > > > > >> > > > > >> As you can see however, array A actually exists as a > > > > >> 40-byte/10-element sequence. B and C are actually pointers which your > > > > >> code needs to initialise to point to a space that can contain a > > > > >> 40-byte/10-element array. > > > > > > > > > > As usual, you describe the semantics in a way designed to make it look > > > > > confusing rather than trying to help anyone understand it. > > > > > > > > Less confusing that your explanation. > > > > > > > > I said that C will resort to deriving a pointer as soon as any attempt > > > > is made to load a full array value. > > > > > > > > > > > > > youre wrong here in close or the seme type of being wrong as people who say array is a pointer > > > > > > what c will 'derive' (if use this word ) > > > is nota pointer, it is and adress > > > > > > adress is quite different thing than pointer, adres for example may be only as immediate value in code section of assembly , or being crafted from some arithmetic and being calculete in register as final results, or some simply also may thing that it is something in a head of a programmer (though if you would like to use value it will need to be provided physically etc), but adress is nota a pointer, same as array is not a pointer ;c (and mostly code tjhat uses arrays need only an edresses not pointers) > > > > > > > > check back some of my post when i was writing that passing struct by-adress > > is a proper way > > > > Some x; > > > > foo(x); //by adress > > > > you totally not need a concept liek pointer here, as pointer is whet you in most cases dont need here (like changing its value etc > > like if you woyuld get foo(Some* x), > > now x is a pointer not and adress, than x++ and weird things like that, generally it is fault tu use pointer here ) > > > > ) what you need and what makes ciode more solid is adress here > > i wrote on this quite fundamental things quite ago btw, i dont know 7 years ago ? maybe 6? > > (i also was writen on concept of pointers in c as being generally done bad way and overused, (like **x ***x ect have no sense) though i dont quite remember my final conclusions now) back then i was writing something on pointers but i dont exactly remember my conclusions and by writing i mean i was also thinking as this what i know about this things comes from my logical considerations which in some way sembles "playing logical chess with myslelf" (what i say after watching some youtube on chess plays and specificaly about michail tal, i never liked ches to much butthis was interesting and logical thinking on some of c aspects resembles it a bit, as you thinking about that, maybe that, maybe thet then see why that, that that probably no and then after some time you got to conclusion and it leads you to another conclusion etc) some of my conclusions/hypothesis afair was pointers ale generaly much overused in c language, that probably double (**) and triple (***) etc pointers have no sense and that maybe possibly you only need one sign to work with pointers not two (*&) preferablu more like sole & and maybe in many casses all that pointers even if used should be hidden in syntax, but i dont remember the details, (maybe i am genarally wrong? idea to minimalise pointers is easy to take, but i cant prove the ide i find maybe good is really good) (i will back to this topic some time i guess)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Bart <bc@freeuk.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 21:20 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <7C6RF.2207$4c1.1692@fx31.am4> |
| In reply to | #148862 |
On 07/01/2020 20:47, fir wrote:
> some of my conclusions/hypothesis afair was pointers ale generaly much overused in c language, that probably double (**) and triple (***) etc pointers have no sense
Plenty of uses for those. Eg:
---------------------------------
int nextchar(char **pp) {
int c = **pp;
++*pp;
return c;
}
int main(void) {
char *p = "abcde";
char c;
while (c=nextchar(&p)) {printf("<%c>",c);}
}
---------------------------------
Or just: int main(int n, char** s){}
*** pointers might be used for 3D arrays implemented via Iliffe vectors.
Or a 2D array of char*.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | gazelle@shell.xmission.com (Kenny McCormack) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2020-01-07 21:53 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <qv2uk7$1vp$1@news.xmission.com> |
| In reply to | #148864 |
In article <7C6RF.2207$4c1.1692@fx31.am4>, Bart <bc@freeuk.com> wrote:
>On 07/01/2020 20:47, fir wrote:
>
>> some of my conclusions/hypothesis afair was pointers ale generaly much overused
>in c language, that probably double (**) and triple (***) etc pointers have no
>sense
>
>Plenty of uses for those. Eg:
A pretty good inductive proof for the utility of pointers with any number
of *s is this:
1) If you have a pointer P of X *s, and you want to pass it into a
function and have the function modify that pointer, then you need
to pass the address of P (i.e., &P) to the function. The function
will declare the received paramter to be a pointer of (X+1) *s.
Therefore, if pointers of X *s are useful, then so are pointers of
(X+1) *s.
2) Pointers of 1 * are useful (I leave it to the reader to convince
themselves of this).
Therefore, pointers of any number of *s are useful.
--
A Catholic woman tells her husband to buy Viagra.
A Jewish woman tells her husband to buy Pfizer.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 10 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 … 10 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c
csiph-web