Mail Archives: djgpp/2001/03/28/14:45:51
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 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.
What about "fat pointers" ?
I have read somewhere that they are in discussion for future C
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/1998-05/msg00073.html
Maurice
--
Maurice Lombardi
Laboratoire de Spectrometrie Physique,
Universite Joseph Fourier de Grenoble, BP87
38402 Saint Martin d'Heres Cedex FRANCE
Tel: 33 (0)4 76 51 47 51
Fax: 33 (0)4 76 51 45 44
mailto:Maurice DOT Lombardi AT ujf-grenoble DOT fr
- Raw text -