C is a better language than any language you care to name.

[Forogar]

What's on second, I Don't Know is on third... hang on! Haven't we had this discussion before?

- I would love to change the world, but they won’t give me the source code.

[ZurdoDev]

Everything you said is nonsense and gibberish and yet I perfectly understood you. :) :thumbsup:

There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.

[Nemanja Trifunovic]

Joe Woodbury wrote:

Arrays are pointers

Joe Woodbury wrote:

the information which gives the extent of the array - the array dimension." THEY NEVER HAD IT

char *p = "hello"; //pointer - no information about the dimension
char q[] = "hello"; // array - contains information about the dimension

printf("%zu\n", sizeof(p)); // => size of pointer to char -- 4 on x86, 8 on x86-64
printf("%zu\n", sizeof(q)); // => size of char array in memory -- 6 on both

utf8-cpp

[Joe Woodbury]

Nemanja Trifunovic wrote:

char *p = "hello"; //pointer - no information about the dimension char q[] = "hello"; // array - contains information about the dimension

No the ARRAY does not. The declaration does and thus the precompiler) and sizeof(), but not the array itself. To illustrate, the function:

void _function(const char r[])
{
printf("%u\n", sizeof(r));
}

Will print 4 or 8, depending on the size of a pointer, when you call _function(q);. Added: Moreover, an optimizing compiler will likely pool both strings and use the same pointer for both operations (especially since it's clear they are both const.) Again, the sizeof() is handled by the precompiler, not at runtime.

[Member 4194593]

It may be fast, but not as fast as MASM. Just look at some of the created code in the .cod listing. Many, many, pipeline stalls in code initialization where a push and pop of ebx would free that reg to share loading eax, then ebx, then saving eax, then saving ebx, and this was in optimized code in a high use function in JKDEFRAG. I'll stick with MASM. Dave.

[Karen Mitchelle]

:laugh: yeah. You had. And it makes me laugh even for the second time. Told you, I have weird humor. ;)

Don't mind those people who say you're not HOT. At least you know you're COOL. I'm not afraid of falling, I'm afraid of the sudden stop at the end of the fall! - Richard Andrew x64

[Karen Mitchelle]

Ahm, how about this language[^]? :)

Don't mind those people who say you're not HOT. At least you know you're COOL. I'm not afraid of falling, I'm afraid of the sudden stop at the end of the fall! - Richard Andrew x64

[Roger Wright]

I'm not sure, but I'll ask my Grammar when she's done baking cookies.

Will Rogers never met me.

[Ravi Bhavnani]

Baking cookies?  I usually just add them to a response. ;P /ravi

My new year resolution: 2048 x 1536 Home | Articles | My .NET bits | Freeware ravib(at)ravib(dot)com

[Vivi Chellappa]

'C' was its grade as a a programming language. C++ got a grade of C-- ;P

[PIEBALDconsult]

I agree. Granted that may be because I don't care to name any others.

You'll never get very far if all you do is follow instructions.

[Lost User]

Are you a VB Code reviewer? :p

[Rutvik Dave]

Chris, I am afraid you have the wrong information. C is not a language, it's an alphabet.

Remind Me This - Manage, Collaborate and Execute your Project in the Cloud

[Roger Wright]

Rutvik Dave wrote:

C is not a language, it's an alphabet.

Actually, it is just one element in a set called an "alphabet." We also have a 'D' and 24 other members in the set.

Will Rogers never met me.

[Argonia]

So C++ is for two cookies? (cookie++ ; ) ;)

Microsoft ... the only place where VARIANT_TRUE != true

[Peter Adam]

The vast majority of the software out there is written in C. The vast majority of software out there has crippling flaws, are out of budget and abandoned after tried to use. QED ;P

[Simon ORiordan from UK]

printf("Why is that then?");

[Michael Kingsford Gray]

OK, I'll "bite". "C" is quite the most disastrous so-called "language"[1] ever to become popular. Why? It's total lack of marshalling over record boundaries in memory have cost the globe at least several 100 trillion dollars in viruses, damages, fornicate-ups, interminable repairs/patches, Trojans, injuries, deaths, et cetera. That alone is enough to relegate this incurable abortion of a syntactical nightmare to the bit-bucket, if not Spandau prison. Have at it, you "C" devils. ___________________________ [1] Designed for punch-card use, brevity & conservation of card-space were essential. It thereby became an impenetrably terse & line-break free mess. All calculated to save IBM punched cards. And the syntax is dangerously ambiguous, all over the shop. Don't get me started on the monumentally bone-headed notion that CASE statements should cascade through without a BREAK clause! I mean. What total idiot "thought" that this would be a great idea?

[Lost User]

Always was and always will be. IMHO. :-O

[BobJanova]

Well no, it's a feature. GCd environments eliminate a large group of common bugs, free the developer to think about higher level stuff and not litter their code with memory management cruft, and are in general a Good Thing. It's just that it's a feature that, in certain particular circumstances (particularly when resource usage is tight), isn't helpful.