Date: Sat, 20 May 2000 05:46:32 +0600 (LKT)
From: Kalum Somaratna aka Grendel <kalum AT lintux DOT cx>
X-Sender: kalum AT roadrunner DOT grendel DOT net
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: allocated memory size
In-Reply-To: <8g36km$r9d$1@plato.wadham.ox.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.10.10005200542070.2249-100000@roadrunner.grendel.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On 19 May 2000, J-P wrote:

> In article <200005190942 DOT LAA19117 AT acp3bf DOT physik DOT rwth-aachen DOT de>,
> Hans-Bernhard Broeker  <djgpp AT delorie DOT com> wrote:
> >Especially since you describe yourself as a C novice, you should
> >*never* do such things. Stick to the core of the language while you're
> >still learning. 
> 
> Pointers *are* the core of the language. If you try and ignore them, you
> don't get very far before you're torn between finally discussing them, or
> suggesting that C "passes by reference."


yes, but IMHO this is a area which newbies find it extremely dificult to
grasp, which is made much more worse by zero based arrays etc. So IMHO
newbies should defer using pointers till they are a bit more confident
about how they work etc..just try explaining the difference between the &
and the * and you will understand....

 
> The sheer usefulness and tried-and-testedness of pointers is, IMHO, what

Please don't forget that this "sheer usefulness and blah blah of pointers"
is also what has led to a countless numbers of errors in programs ranging
from buffer overflows, to GPF's, even guru level programmers are not
immune to making this kind of errors...

Grendel

Hi, I'm a signature virus. plz set me as your signature and help me spread
:)