Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #3511
| From | "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.c++ |
| Subject | Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays |
| Date | 2011-04-12 20:52 +0200 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <io2710$1hr$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <io0bnr$dph$1@dont-email.me> <4da47fb0$0$25624$cc2e38e6@news.uslec.net> <io22nf$fm4$1@dont-email.me> <5t39q65tcht5bc7h7cuasnl4qeu0sqpqc5@4ax.com> |
* cg_chas, on 12.04.2011 20:15:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2011 19:38:53 +0200, "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet"
> <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> * Noah Roberts, on 12.04.2011 18:37:
>>> On 4/11/2011 7:00 PM, Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet wrote:
>> [snip]
>>>
>>>> The second way in which a pointer can point to an array, is the answer
>>>> to question 3, namely
>>>>
>>>> int a[42];
>>>> int* p2 = a; // OK, p2 is a pointer to an array (dynamically).
>>>>
>>>
>>> No.
>>
>> That's silly (see below).
>>
>>
>>> The p2 variable is a pointer to int because an int is what you get when you
>>> dereference it.
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>
>>>> 3) And a pointer of type T* be said to point to an array of T, but only
>>>> in the dynamic sense, like "right now it points to an array".
>>>
>>>
>>> The other important part of pointers is that when the point to elements of an
>>> array, you can perform math on them. This fact though does not change what type
>>> you get when you dereference the pointer. To claim that a pointer points at
>>> anything other than what you get when you dereference it flies in the face of
>>> the concept of "pointer".
>>
>> Here is one counter-example to your claim:
>>
>> int x;
>> void* p =&x;
>>
>> p cannot be derferenced. Hence in your view a claim that it points to/at x
>> "flies in the face of the concept of pointer".
> Ok now I am starting to think that you and Paul are drinking from the same well.
> :)
Don't know about Paul, because he's in my killfile.
But in case it was not obvious, the above exemplifies a direct
self-contradiction in Noah's view.
I think that when a self-contradiction is pointed out, then about the least
reasonable response is to snip the short argument and add a personal attack.
Hence, I plonked him, also because of his earlier allegations about sexual
deviations of Johannes Schaub. And similarly, in the case of Paul, killfiled in
part because of earlier allegations about sexual deviations of Francis
Glasborrow, and in the case of Leigh I remember killfiling him for a tirade
about Pete Becker, on top of generally trollish behavior, but I may have been
wrong, judging from glimpses I've had. But at least regarding Paul and Noah,
these folks are really *real* trolls, people who just love to stir up a fight
and who write all kinds of nasty stuff about others, make no mistake about it.
> Of course a void pointer is an exception. We could also cast the pointer to an
> infinite number of types and expect infinitely different types of yielded
> values.
>
> He does not assert that all pointers must be dereferenceable, just that
> dereferencing the int* in the former example yields an int.
No, what Noah wrote, which is quoted in context above, was
"To claim that a pointer points at anything other than what you get when you
dereference it flies in the face ofthe concept of "pointer".
If, then, he supported the claim that
p points to x
then he would be claiming that p points to something other than what you get
when you dereference it, and hence in his own view that support for the
statement "p points to x" would fly in the face of the concept of "pointer".
Hence Noah cannot reasonably be supporting the view that p points to x.
However, just about everybody else would agree that p points to x.
I am guessing that for example you, too, agree with that.
Be that as it may (about your agreement or not), Noah's view, where p cannot
point to anything, is not in line with the general consensus about the
terminology here. And so it is quite irrelevant as an argument about pointers
that point to arrays, or not. Invalid is invalid, however sweet it may sound.
[snipped irrelevant argumentantion]
Cheers & hth.,
- Alf
--
blog at <url: http://alfps.wordpress.com>
Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 04:00 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Pavel <pauldontspamtolk@removeyourself.dontspam.yahoo> - 2011-04-12 00:13 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 05:17 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 14:02 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 14:10 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 14:49 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-12 10:05 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-12 01:11 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-04-11 23:24 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 00:16 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 13:53 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 14:08 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 14:05 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 14:48 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:53 +1200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 22:14 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-04-12 15:39 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Goran <goran.pusic@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 01:39 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-12 20:51 +1200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Jorgen Grahn <grahn+nntp@snipabacken.se> - 2011-04-12 21:51 +0000
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cpp4ever <n2xssvv.g02gfr12930@ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-12 09:59 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 16:25 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cpp4ever <n2xssvv.g02gfr12930@ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-12 16:07 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 17:32 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cpp4ever <n2xssvv.g02gfr12930@ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-12 16:53 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 18:16 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cpp4ever <n2xssvv.g02gfr12930@ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-12 17:39 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 19:32 +0200
Re: DILLIGAF cpp4ever <n2xssvv.g02gfr12930@ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-12 19:05 +0100
Re: DILLIGAF Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-12 20:36 +0200
Re: DILLIGAF cpp4ever <n2xssvv.g02gfr12930@ntlworld.com> - 2011-04-12 20:47 +0100
Re: DILLIGAF gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 14:48 -0700
Re: DILLIGAF Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-04-12 15:16 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 17:48 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-12 09:37 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 18:34 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 19:38 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-12 11:00 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 20:03 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-12 11:06 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-12 20:26 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-12 11:33 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-12 20:55 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 20:14 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-12 12:47 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-12 22:40 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-12 14:15 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 20:52 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 20:23 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-12 16:01 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-12 13:46 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-04-12 19:49 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays hanukas <jukka@liimatta.org> - 2011-04-13 00:06 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 04:14 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-04-13 07:53 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 09:52 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 05:20 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 10:31 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:04 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 12:35 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:41 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-14 07:47 +1200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-14 11:44 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "io_x" <a@b.c.invalid> - 2011-04-13 18:41 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-13 09:35 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 20:17 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 04:33 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 04:35 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 01:19 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 04:01 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 04:20 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 09:56 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 05:24 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 10:34 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:07 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 12:36 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:43 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 13:18 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 08:30 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 15:57 +0200
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-13 15:10 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 11:09 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 12:04 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-13 09:56 -0700
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 14:11 -0400
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-12 19:29 +0100
Re: On generally accepted terminology for pointers and arrays Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-04-12 09:36 -0700
csiph-web