Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
| From | Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c |
| Subject | Re: Pointers, constant values |
| Date | 2015-10-17 19:39 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87mvvhnxun.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink) |
| References | (6 earlier) <mvrm33$d10$1@dont-email.me> <871tcur0gn.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <mvrpkd$qec$1@dont-email.me> <87vba6pjow.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <mvs4b1$ve1$1@dont-email.me> |
Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: > On 16/10/2015 22:50, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >> Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >> >>> On 16/10/2015 22:02, Ben Bacarisse wrote: >>>> Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> writes: >>> >>>>> Why not? If you want to access the array from inside the function, my >>>>> point is it makes more sense, type-wise, to pass a pointer to the >>>>> array, rather than a pointer to an int. >>>> >>>> I don't want to argue about what "not much point" is. Maybe you see >>>> enough point that it exceeds your threshold for "not much". That's >>>> fine. If so, I offer the C99 option as slightly more useful. >>> >>> The 'point' is that in what seems to be 99% of C code, the wrong type >>> is being passed. >> >> Surely that depends on what type you want to pass. > > Arrays, or the closest that C can manage. Whenever an array of T needs > to be passed to a function, then invariably, a T* pointer will be > passed instead. Well not quite invariably, no, but in the vast majority of cases, yes. Why is that, do you think? You hinted that programmers are being sloppy here or are are just turning a blind eye, but you know that some who are perfectly well aware of the alternatives, choose to pass a pointer to the start rather than to the whole array. <snip> > C can't pass value arrays. Then you can pass a pointer, which is > usually preferable anyway. The question is, what kind of pointer? > > If the array is of type T, then the choice is between passing T(*)[] > and T*. So: > > Caller: Parameter Dereferenced in callee: > > (1) T[] T* T > (2) T[] T(*)[] T[] > > (The dereference is an operation that C can't do directly for pointers > to arrays, as it can't deal with actual array values, and the bounds > might be missing anyway, but it can do so just before applying a [] > indexing op.) > > Here, using T* for the parameter (1), the original T[] can't be > recovered. With the T(*)[] parameter (2), it can. Only in some cases. Interestingly *not* the case you championed that started all this off. In that case the array type was incomplete, so you can't recover it in any useful way. But I agree that you can, in other cases, recover useful things about the array. (The only useful thing I can think of is the size, but maybe you have something else in mind.) > That's why (1) is wrong. Yes, I agree. But you are avoiding saying that (2) is wrong too. Instead, you've invented a notion of which wrong type is "closer" to the type we'd really like to pass if C allowed it. But much more important to the programmer is to decide which of the two pointer types is more convenient most of the time, and I don't think that's really debatable, do you? <snip> -- Ben.
Back to comp.lang.c | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Pointers, constant values Alla _ <modelling.data@gmail.com> - 2015-10-16 00:49 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Philip Lantz <prl@canterey.us> - 2015-10-16 01:49 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-16 09:41 -0400
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 08:55 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 08:25 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 09:11 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 12:06 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 12:55 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-16 17:49 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Lew Pitcher <lew.pitcher@digitalfreehold.ca> - 2015-10-16 13:23 -0400
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-16 19:34 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 12:05 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 12:18 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 12:13 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-16 20:33 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 13:01 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-16 21:09 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 13:41 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-16 21:07 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-16 21:20 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-16 22:02 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-16 22:21 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 14:39 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 15:26 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 15:44 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 16:58 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 17:28 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-16 22:50 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-16 15:14 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-17 01:23 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-17 19:39 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-17 22:42 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-18 00:31 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-18 02:11 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-18 11:59 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-18 12:12 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-18 12:28 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-18 23:16 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-18 23:34 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-19 01:45 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-19 11:51 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-19 12:55 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-19 13:51 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-19 06:02 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 07:02 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-19 15:39 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 08:54 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-19 09:14 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-19 10:21 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-19 12:57 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-19 21:20 +0000
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-20 20:50 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2015-10-21 04:58 +0000
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-19 08:40 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-19 20:17 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-17 16:44 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-18 11:52 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-18 05:15 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-18 21:54 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Malcolm McLean <malcolm.mclean5@btinternet.com> - 2015-10-18 16:09 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-18 07:55 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-18 21:47 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-18 15:37 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-19 00:10 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-18 19:04 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-16 21:13 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2015-10-17 11:27 +1300
Re: Pointers, constant values Bartc <bc@freeuk.com> - 2015-10-17 00:56 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Les Cargill <lcargill99@comcast.com> - 2015-10-16 12:37 -0500
Re: Pointers, constant values James Kuyper <jameskuyper@verizon.net> - 2015-10-16 14:22 -0400
Re: Pointers, constant values Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-16 18:57 +0000
Re: Pointers, constant values Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2015-10-16 20:40 +0100
Re: Pointers, constant values Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-16 20:46 +0000
Re: Pointers, constant values Keith Thompson <kst-u@mib.org> - 2015-10-16 14:24 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2015-10-19 12:43 +0000
Re: Pointers, constant values Siri Cruz <chine.bleu@yahoo.com> - 2015-10-16 13:20 -0700
Re: Pointers, constant values supercat@casperkitty.com - 2015-10-17 13:59 -0700
csiph-web