Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays

From	"Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.c++
Subject	Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays
Date	2011-04-13 23:52 +0200
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<io55ve$dac$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References	<q53bq6h2eg80qaj58eov4ep2kb9kq65th2@4ax.com> <90mjc9FkbtU1@mid.individual.net>

Show all headers | View raw

* Ian Collins, on 13.04.2011 23:37:
>
> One point I don't think has been argued over: when is an array not an array?

One can possibly say that an array of zero size is not an array.

Such an array (or non-array?) can only be allocated dynamically.


> If after int* p1 = new int[42]; p pints to an array, what does ++p point to?
> Another array? If p is a pointer to an array, does incrementing p change it to
> something else?

You're confusing/conflating two levels of formality, so to speak.

Another example of that: a small heap plus a little grain of sand is still 
small, and so on...

If you want a reasonable way to think about it, then (new int[42])+1 points into 
an array, and it also points to the start of a sub-array.


> The standard is unambiguous as to what p is:
>
> 5.3.4/1:
>
> "If it is an array, the new-expression returns a pointer
> to the initial element of the array."

That's quite a bit ambiguous, for what is the first element of the array when 
the array is of zero size?

But it doesn't really matter.

I only point that out so that you can see that discussing number of angels here, 
and so forth, is of no practical value whatsoever. Intelligence must be applied. 
And then, with some intelligence, nobody cares about them angels. ;-)


> and what p2 above is:
>
> 4.2/1:
>
> "An lvalue or rvalue of type “array of N T” or “array of unknown bound of T” can
> be converted to an rvalue of type “pointer to T.” The result is a pointer to the
> first element of the array."
>
>> My thoughts are:
>>
>> In any C++ discussion about pointer to T, is it really ever silly to say that an
>> int* points to the initial element of an array of int when it is well-defined to
>> do so?
>> No.
>>
>> It is not silly because widely recognized C++ sources say it just that way.
>> 1) The C++ Programming Language, Bjarne Stroustrup section 5.3 Pointers into
>> Arrays
>> 2) Accelerated C++, Andrew Koenig 10.1.3 Arrays (last paragraph, second
>> sentence)
>> 3) ISO/IEC 14882 5.3.4 New (paragraph 1, last two senctences)
>>
>> In any C++ discussion about pointer to T, is what is claimed to be "generally
>> acceptable" (the statement that an int* points to an array) ever truly
>> technically correct?
>> No.
>>
>> If the discussion is about "pointer to T" then it is both inaccurate and
>> irresponsible to say that an int* points to an array. Only in the most casual
>> and general sense is this statement acceptable and only when the discussion is
>> not about "pointer to T".
>
> I agree.

Oh, you shouldn't agree to such glib conclusions about nonsense, no matter how 
well formulated.

It's what we in the old days called techno-babble.

Not that it hurts very much to agree to any single such, but the cumulative 
effect of techno-babble may at some point be that meaningful communication 
becomes impossible (and I think that that effect has hindered the 
standardization process, but that's just my not even well-informed opinion).


Cheers & hth.,

- Alf

-- 
blog at <url: http://alfps.wordpress.com>

Thread

well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 08:27 -0400
  Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays SG <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:00 -0700
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays SG <s.gesemann@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:26 -0700
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-13 10:21 -0700
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 11:45 -0400
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 20:57 -0700
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-14 12:40 +0200
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-14 07:24 -0400
          Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-14 07:32 -0400
  Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays gwowen <gwowen@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 07:51 -0700
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 12:00 -0400
  Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-13 20:29 +0200
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 15:35 -0400
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 22:36 +0200
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 17:37 -0400
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-14 02:12 +0200
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 20:23 -0400
  Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-14 09:37 +1200
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 17:41 -0400
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-13 17:01 -0700
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 20:25 -0400
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-13 23:52 +0200
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 18:19 -0400
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 00:30 +0200
          Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 19:21 -0400
            Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 03:11 +0200
              Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-13 23:12 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 06:39 +0200
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Noah Roberts <dont@email.me> - 2011-04-13 17:04 -0700
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology   regarding pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-14 10:32 +1200
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology   regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-14 00:45 +0200
          Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology     regarding pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-14 10:54 +1200
  Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-17 22:00 +0100
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-17 19:37 -0400
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 02:54 +0100
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 14:15 +1200
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-17 22:26 -0400
          Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-18 10:57 +0200
            Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 08:31 -0400
              Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 15:00 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 12:19 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 17:49 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 14:18 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 20:56 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 16:20 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 22:09 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 17:22 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 22:36 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 17:43 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 23:47 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 20:59 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-19 11:29 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-19 06:43 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-19 12:24 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 05:52 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-20 14:28 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 09:36 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-20 15:29 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 11:00 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-20 16:15 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 07:15 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 14:03 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 09:22 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 15:10 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-22 19:28 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-22 18:31 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-22 18:44 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-22 20:04 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-22 21:42 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays TJorgenson <tjorgenson@infinera.com> - 2011-04-22 14:21 -0700
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-22 22:24 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-22 23:47 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-04-22 15:56 -0700
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-23 02:45 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-04-22 20:30 -0700
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-23 05:15 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-23 17:25 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Alf P. Steinbach /Usenet" <alf.p.steinbach+usenet@gmail.com> - 2011-04-23 06:37 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-23 12:56 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Joshua Maurice <joshuamaurice@gmail.com> - 2011-04-23 20:25 -0700
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-24 13:42 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays TJorgenson <tjorgenson@infinera.com> - 2011-04-22 18:15 -0700
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-23 03:29 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-19 01:06 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 21:06 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 21:27 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-19 11:23 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-19 06:41 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 01:37 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 05:33 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 13:57 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 09:25 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 17:18 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 14:07 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 22:42 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 17:44 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-21 00:56 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 08:12 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-22 19:34 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Öö Tiib <ootiib@hot.ee> - 2011-04-20 16:08 -0700
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 18:41 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 14:37 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 09:33 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 19:09 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 14:36 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 22:53 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 17:49 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 00:52 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 07:21 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 14:24 +0100
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-22 20:00 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-22 20:09 +0100
              Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-18 16:08 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 11:08 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-19 01:20 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 21:18 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-19 11:15 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-19 05:40 -0400
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-20 19:36 +0200
                Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-20 16:07 -0400
                OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-21 00:31 +0200
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 00:16 -0400
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 09:00 -0400
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 14:12 +0100
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 14:32 +0100
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 09:36 -0400
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 17:54 +0100
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 16:46 -0400
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-21 23:45 +0100
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Peter Remmers <p.remmers@expires-2011-04-30.arcornews.de> - 2011-04-22 12:02 +0200
                Re: OT: Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-21 00:56 -0400
    Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 02:40 +0100
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-17 22:31 -0400
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-17 22:47 -0400
        Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 16:54 +0100
          Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Leigh Johnston <leigh@i42.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 17:00 +0100
            Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays "Paul" <pchristor@yahoo.co.uk> - 2011-04-18 17:17 +0100
          Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays cg_chas <cg_chas@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 12:26 -0400
      Re: well-defined terminology versus generally accepted terminology regarding pointers and arrays Ian Collins <ian-news@hotmail.com> - 2011-04-18 14:38 +1200

csiph-web