Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault?

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:

Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes:
>

James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes:
>

Just as 1 is an integer literal whose value cannot be modified,
[...]

>
The C language doesn't have integer literals.  C has string
literals, and compound literals, and it has integer constants.
But C does not have integer literals.

>
True, but C++ does, and it means the same thing by "integer literal"
that C means by "integer constant".

This is comp.lang.c, not comp.lang.c++.  You flog Bart for using
C-standard-defined terms wrongly.  This case is no different.

C doesn't define the term "integer
literal" with any conflicting meaning, and my use of the C++ terminology
allowed me to make the parallel with string literals clearer, so I don't
see any particular problem with my choice of words.

In this case you are in the wrong.  Just be a man and admit it.  Oh, I
forgot, your rhetorical religion doesn't allow you to admit any
linguistic imperfection, so you try to sleaze your way to a different
subject so you can continue to argue.