Re: What am I doing wrong?

[Richard Heathfield]

Ben Bacarisse said:

Cromulent <cromulent@just extrememetal.co mwrites:
>

<snip>

>>
>int tokeniseInput(c har readstring[])

>
readstring is a pointer despite the []. C can't pass arrays and
rather than forbid this syntax it was taken to mean the same as char
*readstring in the context.

No, that wasn't the reason, as a matter of fact. In the early days of C,
pointers were described using [] rather than *. It wasn't long before the
* was introduced, at which point [] was used exclusively for arrays,
*except* in this situation - i.e. a function receiving a pointer as a
parameter. Just why it was retained, I don't know - possibly a nod in the
direction of backwards compatibility.

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999

[Ben Bacarisse]

Re: What am I doing wrong?

Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.in validwrites:

Ben Bacarisse said:
>

>Cromulent <cromulent@just extrememetal.co mwrites:
>>

<snip>

>>>
>>int tokeniseInput(c har readstring[])

>>
>readstring is a pointer despite the []. C can't pass arrays and
>rather than forbid this syntax it was taken to mean the same as char
>*readstring in the context.

>
No, that wasn't the reason, as a matter of fact. In the early days of C,
pointers were described using [] rather than *. It wasn't long before the
* was introduced, at which point [] was used exclusively for arrays,
*except* in this situation - i.e. a function receiving a pointer as a
parameter. Just why it was retained, I don't know - possibly a nod in the
direction of backwards compatibility.

That's an interesting bit of history but it does not contradict
anything I said. Image an historically accurate parenthetical remark
"(when the * syntax was introduced to declare pointers)" between "and"
and "rather". In other words, thank you for adding the context I left
out, but did you have to start your answer with the word "no"?

--
Ben.

[Richard Heathfield]

Re: What am I doing wrong?

Ben Bacarisse said:

Richard Heathfield <rjh@see.sig.in validwrites:
>

>Ben Bacarisse said:
>>

>>Cromulent <cromulent@just extrememetal.co mwrites:
>>>

><snip>

>>>>
>>>int tokeniseInput(c har readstring[])
>>>
>>readstring is a pointer despite the []. C can't pass arrays and
>>rather than forbid this syntax it was taken to mean the same as char
>>*readstring in the context.

>>
>No, that wasn't the reason, as a matter of fact. In the early days of C,
>pointers were described using [] rather than *. It wasn't long before
>the * was introduced, at which point [] was used exclusively for arrays,
>*except* in this situation - i.e. a function receiving a pointer as a
>parameter. Just why it was retained, I don't know - possibly a nod in
>the direction of backwards compatibility.

>
That's an interesting bit of history but it does not contradict
anything I said.

Then I must have misunderstood what you said.

<snip>

--
Richard Heathfield <http://www.cpax.org.uk >
Email: -http://www. +rjh@
Google users: <http://www.cpax.org.uk/prg/writings/googly.php>
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999