Sujet : Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?
De : Keith.S.Thompson+u (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Keith Thompson)
Groupes : comp.lang.cDate : 10. Jul 2024, 05:56:47
Autres entêtes
Organisation : None to speak of
Message-ID : <87h6cxx2sw.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
User-Agent : Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
Lawrence D'Oliveiro <
ldo@nz.invalid> writes:
On Sat, 06 Jul 2024 15:38:14 -0700, Keith Thompson wrote:
>
BGB <cr88192@gmail.com> writes:
>
... in the 1D case, an array can be seen as functionally an
implicitly defined pointer ...
No, there is no implicitly defined pointer.
>
...
If you evaluate the expression `array_object` in most contexts, it's
implicitly converted to a pointer *value*, pointing to the 0th element
of the array object. There is still no implicit pointer object.
>
The OP said “pointer”, not “pointer object” or “pointer value”. Not sure
what hair you are trying to split here.
Not sure what was unclear.
-- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.comvoid Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */
Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?
Re: technology discussion → does the world need a "new" C ?
