How to concatenate Matrix's elements ?

[Nezhate]

Hi all,
Is there any way to print a matrix's elements using a simple printf ?
what I want as result is for example:
if mat ={0,1,2,3}
result must be: "0123".

I tried this code:

/*************** *************** *************** *************** ***/
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>

#define size 10

int main (void)
{
// Declaration
int i = 0;
int mat[size]= {0,0,0,0};
char convert[size]= {0,0,0,0};

for (i=0;i<4;i++)
{
mat[i]=mat[i]+i+1;
printf("mat[%d]=%d\n",i,mat[i]);

// Convert int to string
sprintf(convert ,"%s",(char *)&mat[i]);
// concatenate matrix's elements
// strcat(convert[i+1],convert[i]);

}

printf ("Matrix is equal to %s\n",(char *)&convert);

return (0);
}

/*************** *************** *************** *************** ***/

After execution I get this
$ ./matrix
mat[0]=1
mat[1]=2
mat[2]=3
mat[3]=4
Matrix is equal to 

If I activate the line :
strcat(convert[i+1],convert[i]);
I get
matrix.c: In function ‘main’:
matrix.c:23: warning: passing argument 1 of ‘strcat’ makes pointer
from integer without a cast
matrix.c:23: warning: passing argument 2 of ‘strcat’ makes pointer
from integer without a cast

And when executing :
./matrix
mat[0]=1
Segmentation fault.

[Chris Dollin]

rahul wrote:

That looks slick. Better than calling realloc/malloc(which makes system
calls to underlying OS on most of the platforms; quiet expansive)

Doesn't one /want/ (many) realloc calls to be quietly expansive?

--
'It changed the future .. and it changed us.' /Babylon 5/

Hewlett-Packard Limited Cain Road, Bracknell, registered
no:
registered office: Berks RG12 1HN 690597
England

[rahul]

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:34:24 +0530, Chris Dollin <ch**********@h p.com>
wrote:

>
Doesn't one /want/ (many) realloc calls to be quietly expansive?

That looks slick. Better than calling realloc/malloc(which makes system
calls to underlying OS on most of the platforms; QUITE expansive)

-- Posted on news://freenews.netfront.net - Complaints to ne**@netfront.n et --

[rahul]

On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 17:34:24 +0530, Chris Dollin <ch**********@h p.com>
wrote:

rahul wrote:

>That looks slick. Better than calling realloc/malloc(which makes system
calls to underlying OS on most of the platforms; quiet expansive)

Doesn't one /want/ (many) realloc calls to be quietly expansive?

QUITE EXPENSIVE (before you correct my other misspelling)
-- Posted on news://freenews.netfront.net - Complaints to ne**@netfront.n et --