Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/03/27/04:26:54
On Tue, 27 Mar 2001, Jack Klein wrote:
> > It works, and not by accident. But you are right: it's bad C.
>
> No, there is no requirement that a pointer to an array of chars has
> the same representation as a pointer to char, just as there is no
> requirement for pointer to any different scalar types to have the same
> representation, with the exception of pointer to char and pointer to
> void.
Well, if this is the accident you had in mind, then I agree. But on any
machine whose representation of pointers to all objects is identical, the
code in question will work.
- Raw text -