By using this site, you agree to our updated Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Manage your Cookies Settings.
445,778 Members | 1,957 Online
Bytes IT Community
+ Ask a Question
Need help? Post your question and get tips & solutions from a community of 445,778 IT Pros & Developers. It's quick & easy.

call for a faq

P: n/a
Hi, I'd like to propose a clear, simple and illustrated explainations
(from this newsgroup community)
about the most important argument of the C language: array and
pointers.
Yes I know that there are a lot of faq, site and books but my idea is
to remake this in a schematic and
clear manner and to remake this by people that really wants to write
this paper for all.

My idea is to starting from the standard ISO C definitions of the:
- variable;
- constants;
- l-value and r-value;
- array with n-dimensions
- pointers
- pointer to pointer
- array of pointers
- pointer to array

and than debating about these arguments giving our interpretations
(with simple and clear examples)
and, at the end, making a final paper.

Bye

Sep 29 '06 #1
Share this Question
Share on Google+
30 Replies


P: n/a

xdevel 写道:
Hi, I'd like to propose a clear, simple and illustrated explainations
(from this newsgroup community)
about the most important argument of the C language: array and
pointers.
Yes I know that there are a lot of faq, site and books but my idea is
to remake this in a schematic and
clear manner and to remake this by people that really wants to write
this paper for all.

My idea is to starting from the standard ISO C definitions of the:
- variable;
- constants;
- l-value and r-value;
- array with n-dimensions
- pointers
- pointer to pointer
- array of pointers
- pointer to array

and than debating about these arguments giving our interpretations
(with simple and clear examples)
and, at the end, making a final paper.

Bye
Er, good idea. I am going to write a book about advanced C programming
and C tricks.
Wish you good luck!

Sep 29 '06 #2

P: n/a
"xdevel" <xd********@yahoo.comwrites:
Hi, I'd like to propose a clear, simple and illustrated explainations
(from this newsgroup community)
about the most important argument of the C language: array and
pointers.
Have you read section 6 of the comp.lang.c FAQ, <http://www.c-faq.com/>?

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) ks***@mib.org <http://www.ghoti.net/~kst>
San Diego Supercomputer Center <* <http://users.sdsc.edu/~kst>
We must do something. This is something. Therefore, we must do this.
Sep 29 '06 #3

P: n/a

Keith Thompson ha scritto:
Have you read section 6 of the comp.lang.c FAQ, <http://www.c-faq.com/>?
yes, and it's a good job (there are also other good jobs in Internet)
and I know that a programmer should reuse not only the code ...
but my idea is that we could write a schematic, clear and ordered paper
and
not in the forms of 'section at a time' or 'question at time'.

anyway it's only a proposal!

Sep 29 '06 #4

P: n/a
On 29 Sep 2006 02:35:21 -0700, in comp.lang.c , "xdevel"
<xd********@yahoo.comwrote:
>
Keith Thompson ha scritto:
>Have you read section 6 of the comp.lang.c FAQ, <http://www.c-faq.com/>?

yes, and it's a good job (there are also other good jobs in Internet)
and I know that a programmer should reuse not only the code ...
but my idea is that we could write a schematic, clear and ordered paper
and
not in the forms of 'section at a time' or 'question at time'.

anyway it's only a proposal!
You could always write one and submit it to the CLC wiki, though how
well maintained that is, I don't know.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
Sep 29 '06 #5

P: n/a
Mark McIntyre ha scritto:
You could always write one and submit it to the CLC wiki,
Do you mean that I should start to write a draft paper and to submit it
to CLC and than, there, waiting if other people wants to partecipate ?

Sep 29 '06 #6

P: n/a
xdevel said:
My idea is to starting from the standard ISO C definitions of the:
- variable;
- constants;
- l-value and r-value;
- array with n-dimensions
- pointers
- pointer to pointer
- array of pointers
- pointer to array

and than debating about these arguments giving our interpretations
What's to debate? This is all very simple stuff, and our interpretations are
neither here nor there. What matters is what the Standard says.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Sep 29 '06 #7

P: n/a
"xdevel" <xd********@yahoo.comwrote in message
news:11**********************@m7g2000cwm.googlegro ups.com...
Hi, I'd like to propose a clear, simple and illustrated
explainations
(from this newsgroup community)
about the most important argument of the C language: array and
pointers.
Yes I know that there are a lot of faq, site and books but my idea
is
to remake this in a schematic and
clear manner and to remake this by people that really wants to write
this paper for all.

My idea is to starting from the standard ISO C definitions of the:
- variable;
- constants;
- l-value and r-value;
- array with n-dimensions
- pointers
- pointer to pointer
- array of pointers
- pointer to array

and than debating about these arguments giving our interpretations
(with simple and clear examples)
and, at the end, making a final paper.

"A TUTORIAL ON POINTERS AND ARRAYS IN C"
(http://pw1.netcom.com/~tjensen/ptr/pointers.htm), seems to do this
extremely well, and I am having no trouble understanding pointers from
it. But, if you want to write one I'm definately not stopping you.
Sep 29 '06 #8

P: n/a

Richard Heathfield ha scritto:
What's to debate? This is all very simple stuff, and our interpretations are
neither here nor there. What matters is what the Standard says.
Dear Richard,
have you got some problems If I invite someone (also me, of course) to
write something on the argument
and then assembling all in an organic paper on the argument that
find to explain in a simple manner what the standard say??

Don't you think that, what is simple for you - my C guru - colud not
be simple
for others?

Am I free to post, with humility, this idea? or not?

If you don't agree simple don't write anything on the argument

I don't think that if someone wants to partecipate give you a problem,
right?

Sep 29 '06 #9

P: n/a

BWIGLEY ha scritto:
"A TUTORIAL ON POINTERS AND ARRAYS IN C"
(http://pw1.netcom.com/~tjensen/ptr/pointers.htm), seems to do this
extremely well, and I am having no trouble understanding pointers from
it. But, if you want to write one I'm definately not stopping you.
Thanks for the notice I'll take it

Sep 29 '06 #10

P: n/a
xdevel said:
>
Richard Heathfield ha scritto:
>What's to debate? This is all very simple stuff, and our interpretations
are neither here nor there. What matters is what the Standard says.

Dear Richard,
have you got some problems If I invite someone (also me, of course) to
write something on the argument
No, not at all. You asked for opinions. I gave mine. Have you got some
problems with people offering their opinions when asked?
If you don't agree simple don't write anything on the argument
I think that's a ludicrous idea. If you don't agree that you're being
ridiculous, don't bother to reply. (Think about it.)

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Sep 29 '06 #11

P: n/a

Richard Heathfield ha scritto:
No, not at all. You asked for opinions. I gave mine. Have you got some
problems with people offering their opinions when asked?
No, not at all but I answer to you, probabily in a wrong way, because
it seems that what you say is always a DEFINITIVE answers to the
questions...

anyway is not my intention to open with you an useless and poor debate
and
I hope that if in the future something will be write you can tell us
our opinion.

Sep 29 '06 #12

P: n/a
On 29 Sep 2006 06:04:43 -0700, in comp.lang.c , "xdevel"
<xd********@yahoo.comwrote:
>
Richard Heathfield ha scritto:
>No, not at all. You asked for opinions. I gave mine. Have you got some
problems with people offering their opinions when asked?
I think xdevel's first language isn't english and so he (or she)
mis-expressed themselves.
>I hope that if in the future something will be write you can tell us
our opinion.
Richard does this all the time.

--
Mark McIntyre

"Debugging is twice as hard as writing the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you write the code as cleverly as possible, you are,
by definition, not smart enough to debug it."
--Brian Kernighan
Sep 29 '06 #13

P: n/a
xdevel wrote:
Richard Heathfield ha scritto:
>No, not at all. You asked for opinions. I gave mine. Have you got some
problems with people offering their opinions when asked?

No, not at all but I answer to you, probabily in a wrong way, because
it seems that what you say is always a DEFINITIVE answers to the
questions...
Because he is sure of his opinion in this case, and has told you so.
You are free to disagree. Suggesting he not comment on a public request
for comments is silly.

You could, of course, accuse him of "bike-shedding" (look it up! It's
funny!) though I would not necessarily agree.
Sep 29 '06 #14

P: n/a
Mark McIntyre said:
On 29 Sep 2006 06:04:43 -0700, in comp.lang.c , "xdevel"
<xd********@yahoo.comwrote:
>>I hope that if in the future something will be write you can tell us
our opinion.

Richard does this all the time.
<grin>

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Sep 29 '06 #15

P: n/a
On Fri, 2006-29-09 at 11:00 -0400, Clever Monkey wrote:
xdevel wrote:
Richard Heathfield ha scritto:
No, not at all. You asked for opinions. I gave mine. Have you got some
problems with people offering their opinions when asked?
No, not at all but I answer to you, probabily in a wrong way, because
it seems that what you say is always a DEFINITIVE answers to the
questions...
Because he is sure of his opinion in this case, and has told you so.
You are free to disagree. Suggesting he not comment on a public request
for comments is silly.

You could, of course, accuse him of "bike-shedding" (look it up! It's
funny!) though I would not necessarily agree.
Since going to the urban dictionary would hardly be the first instinct
of a non-English speaker, here's a link for (s)him:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=bikeshedding

--
Andrew Poelstra <http://www.wpsoftware.net/projects/>

Sep 29 '06 #16

P: n/a
"xdevel" <xd********@yahoo.comwrote in message
Hi, I'd like to propose a clear, simple and illustrated explainations
(from this newsgroup community)
about the most important argument of the C language: array and
pointers.
Yes I know that there are a lot of faq, site and books but my idea is
to remake this in a schematic and
clear manner and to remake this by people that really wants to write
this paper for all.

My idea is to starting from the standard ISO C definitions of the:
- variable;
- constants;
- l-value and r-value;
- array with n-dimensions
- pointers
- pointer to pointer
- array of pointers
- pointer to array

and than debating about these arguments giving our interpretations
(with simple and clear examples)
and, at the end, making a final paper.

Bye
We've already got a faq, which is a list of frequently-asked questions.
There is not much point writing a competing one.
What you seem to be looking for is more of a tutorial on C arrays and
pointers, endorsed by the comp.lang.c community.
Why not go to the faq, and pull out the questions that you feel are the ones
that are espeically relevant. The rework the material so that it is maybe
more accessible or more foussed on what you want.
Then repost the summary and see what people think.

Steve Summit is faq maintainer and has copyright over the faq, so you should
ask him before posting the revised material, however I doubt he will mind.

--
www.personal.leeds.ac.uk/~bgy1mm
freeware games to download.
Sep 30 '06 #17

P: n/a
"Andrew Poelstra" <ap*******@false.sitewrote in message
news:1159572295.9604.1.camel@NCIX-linux...
You could, of course, accuse him of "bike-shedding" (look it up! It's
funny!) though I would not necessarily agree.

Since going to the urban dictionary would hardly be the first instinct
of a non-English speaker, here's a link for (s)him:
Works for (s)he and he(r), not so much for s/him. Can't we just go back to
one. "One might go to this link..." Or say, "fuck it" and use "He" like
always. Girls - get used to it. I've often walked up to a group of females
only and said, "What's up, guys?" with no offense - is it different around
the world? I know the British find it amusing to hear someone say, "I met up
with a bunch of my friends, last night." As if my friends were bananas in a
bunch.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=bikeshedding
There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means "England
person speaking English".

That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a bicycle!
No one else could coin a term, that would enter the common vernacular, about
painting a shed - made for a bicycle - before building the house itself.

I the U.S. we just put a hook on the garage wall and hang it there.

MAYBE you could make a case for "fence-painting".

--
Mabden

Oct 1 '06 #18

P: n/a
xdevel wrote:
>
Hi, I'd like to propose a clear, simple and illustrated
explainations (from this newsgroup community) about the most
important argument of the C language: array and pointers.
Please limit your line length to 72 or so. 65 is better. Try the
following, especially the c-faq:

--
Some useful references about C:
<http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
<http://www.eskimo.com/~scs/C-faq/top.html>
<http://benpfaff.org/writings/clc/off-topic.html>
<http://anubis.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc22/wg14/www/docs/n869/(C99)
<http://www.dinkumware.com/refxc.html (C-library}
<http://gcc.gnu.org/onlinedocs/ (GNU docs)
<http://clc-wiki.net (C-info)
Oct 1 '06 #19

P: n/a
Mabden said:

<snip>
There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means "England
person speaking English".

That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a
bicycle!
It makes more sense when you realise that (whilst sheds for "a bicycle" do
exist) a typical bike shed is actually intended for sheltering *many*
bicycles, and is typically installed in schools, workplaces, etc. It
comprises a long row of bicycle wheel mounts (exact design varies), and a
rudimentary (typically wooden) roof, but no walls - just support pillars
for the roof. A shed might provide shelter for 20, 50, or even 100
bicycles.

--
Richard Heathfield
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29/7/1999
http://www.cpax.org.uk
email: rjh at above domain (but drop the www, obviously)
Oct 1 '06 #20

P: n/a
In article <of******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com >,
Mabden <Ma****@SBCglobal.netwrote:
>There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means "England
person speaking English".
>That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a bicycle!
No one else could coin a term, that would enter the common vernacular, about
painting a shed - made for a bicycle - before building the house itself.
>I the U.S. we just put a hook on the garage wall and hang it there.
Hmmm, the Palo Alto {Stanford University} BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
[light rail] station has bike sheds. I've seen them other places
in the USA as well.
--
All is vanity. -- Ecclesiastes
Oct 1 '06 #21

P: n/a
Clever Monkey wrote:
You could, of course, accuse him of "bike-shedding" (look it up! It's
funny!) though I would not necessarily agree.
Not in a 1000 years could anyone accuse Richard of bike-shedding.

Oct 1 '06 #22

P: n/a
xdevel wrote:
but my idea is that we could write a schematic, clear and ordered paper
and
not in the forms of 'section at a time' or 'question at time'.

anyway it's only a proposal!
Maybe you could get to work by starting the "XML schema" for it and compulsory
Java program to encode and generate it all.
Oct 1 '06 #23

P: n/a
"Walter Roberson" <ro******@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.cawrote in message
news:ef**********@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca...
In article <of******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com >,
Mabden <Ma****@SBCglobal.netwrote:
There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means
"England
person speaking English".
That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a
bicycle!
No one else could coin a term, that would enter the common vernacular,
about
painting a shed - made for a bicycle - before building the house itself.
I the U.S. we just put a hook on the garage wall and hang it there.

Hmmm, the Palo Alto {Stanford University} BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
[light rail] station has bike sheds. I've seen them other places
in the USA as well.
OK, but we don't call them bike sheds, and we don't build them before the
BART station. And they are usually just a series of tin boxes in the parking
lot - "painting a shed" implies something fancier and hand-made.

I find it amusing that someone takes the time to come back with a critique
of my little observation that we do things differently, yet doesn't have a
problem with my idea of renaming "English speaking people" to something like
"England living people speaking the English language"; which I thought would
be the hot button of the post.

OK, well sorry for bringing this to the C forum. I was trying to be good...

--
Mabden
Oct 2 '06 #24

P: n/a
Mabden wrote:
"Walter Roberson" <ro******@ibd.nrc-cnrc.gc.cawrote in message
news:ef**********@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca...
>>In article <of******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com >,
Mabden <Ma****@SBCglobal.netwrote:

>>>There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means

"England
>>>person speaking English".
>>>That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a

bicycle!
>>>No one else could coin a term, that would enter the common vernacular,

about
>>>painting a shed - made for a bicycle - before building the house itself.
>>>I the U.S. we just put a hook on the garage wall and hang it there.

Hmmm, the Palo Alto {Stanford University} BART (Bay Area Rapid Transit)
[light rail] station has bike sheds. I've seen them other places
in the USA as well.


OK, but we don't call them bike sheds, and we don't build them before the
BART station. And they are usually just a series of tin boxes in the parking
lot - "painting a shed" implies something fancier and hand-made.

I find it amusing that someone takes the time to come back with a critique
of my little observation that we do things differently, yet doesn't have a
problem with my idea of renaming "English speaking people" to something like
"England living people speaking the English language"; which I thought would
be the hot button of the post.

OK, well sorry for bringing this to the C forum. I was trying to be good...
Ah.. you dont know what a bike shed is,check link!!
That is what proper bike sheds should look like.
(in Holland)
http://findpictures.trafficlinq.nl/d...id=1665&mode=1
Oct 2 '06 #25

P: n/a
Sjouke Burry <bu*************@ppllaanneett.nnlllwrote:
Mabden wrote:
OK, but we don't call them bike sheds, and we don't build them before the
BART station. And they are usually just a series of tin boxes in the parking
lot - "painting a shed" implies something fancier and hand-made.
Ah.. you dont know what a bike shed is,check link!!
That is what proper bike sheds should look like.
(in Holland)
http://findpictures.trafficlinq.nl/d...id=1665&mode=1
*Thwap* Dat is geen Holland, da's Stad. Museumbrug, als ik mij niet
vergis. (Holland != Nederland, en Groningen is bepaald _geen_ Holland,
Roabenhaupt zij dank.)

Richard
Oct 3 '06 #26

P: n/a
Andrew Poelstra <ap*******@false.sitewrote:
On Fri, 2006-29-09 at 11:00 -0400, Clever Monkey wrote:
You could, of course, accuse him of "bike-shedding" (look it up! It's
funny!) though I would not necessarily agree.

Since going to the urban dictionary would hardly be the first instinct
of a non-English speaker, here's a link for (s)him:

http://www.urbandictionary.com/defin...m=bikeshedding
Why accept substitutes, when you could just as easily go to the
original?

<http://catb.org/jargon/html/B/bikeshedding.html>.

Richard
Oct 3 '06 #27

P: n/a
In article <of******************@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com"M abden" <Ma****@SBCglobal.netwrites:
....
There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means "England
person speaking English".

That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a bicycle!
Oh. Dutch "fietsenstalling", "fietsenhok".
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
Oct 3 '06 #28

P: n/a
In article <fd********************@bt.comin*****@invalid.invalid writes:
Mabden said:
There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means "England
person speaking English".

That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a
bicycle!

It makes more sense when you realise that (whilst sheds for "a bicycle" do
exist) a typical bike shed is actually intended for sheltering *many*
bicycles, and is typically installed in schools, workplaces, etc. It
comprises a long row of bicycle wheel mounts (exact design varies), and a
rudimentary (typically wooden) roof, but no walls - just support pillars
for the roof. A shed might provide shelter for 20, 50, or even 100
bicycles.
In the UK perhaps, in the Netherlands there are fully enclosed bycicle
sheds, even when they are intended for many bicycles. When I was young,
my bicycle was put at night in a "fietsenstalling", which was a commercial
untertaking where you put in your bicycle. I beleive it could cover some
200 bicycles, and was fully enclosed. Bicycles were mounted on racks in
two layers.
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
Oct 3 '06 #29

P: n/a
In article <45**********************@text.nova.planet.nlSjouk e Burry <bu*************@ppllaanneett.nnlllwrites:
....
Ah.. you dont know what a bike shed is,check link!!
That is what proper bike sheds should look like.
(in Holland)
http://findpictures.trafficlinq.nl/d...id=1665&mode=1
Or a "fietsflat":
<http://www.wereldexpat.nl/assets/expat/kliphuiscolumn1_fietsflat.jpg>
for 2500 bicycles (but it is too small).
--
dik t. winter, cwi, kruislaan 413, 1098 sj amsterdam, nederland, +31205924131
home: bovenover 215, 1025 jn amsterdam, nederland; http://www.cwi.nl/~dik/
Oct 3 '06 #30

P: n/a
Dik T. Winter wrote:
In article <fd********************@bt.comin*****@invalid.invalid writes:
Mabden said:
There should be a better phrase than "English speaker" that means "England
person speaking English".

That is the only country that would have a shed specifically for a
bicycle!
>
It makes more sense when you realise that (whilst sheds for "a bicycle" do
exist) a typical bike shed is actually intended for sheltering *many*
bicycles, and is typically installed in schools, workplaces, etc. It
comprises a long row of bicycle wheel mounts (exact design varies), and a
rudimentary (typically wooden) roof, but no walls - just support pillars
for the roof. A shed might provide shelter for 20, 50, or even 100
bicycles.

In the UK perhaps, in the Netherlands there are fully enclosed bycicle
sheds, even when they are intended for many bicycles. When I was young,
my bicycle was put at night in a "fietsenstalling", which was a commercial
untertaking where you put in your bicycle. I beleive it could cover some
200 bicycles, and was fully enclosed. Bicycles were mounted on racks in
two layers.
FWIW, the company I work for (in Germany) has fully enclosed bike
sheds that you can unlock with the same transmitter that you need to
get into the building.
Nice feature for us cyclists :-)

Cheers
Michael
--
E-Mail: Mine is an /at/ gmx /dot/ de address.
Oct 3 '06 #31

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.