Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!nntp-server.caltech.edu!jerbil
From: jerbil@nntp-server.caltech.edu (Joseph R. Beckenbach)
Newsgroups: comp.society.futures
Subject: More signal, please?
Message-ID: <1990Sep21.224554.23257@nntp-server.caltech.edu>
Date: 21 Sep 90 22:45:54 GMT
References: <1990Sep21.193403.20381@abcfd20.larc.nasa.gov> <63751@lanl.gov>
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 46


	Apparently I am missing a good many things in this thread.
It seems that there are several assumptions which never appeared in earlier
postings, and which underlie the argument so far.  Time to ask participants
to regroup, so I can be sure I'm reading articles with semantic content?


jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>Try sending [an] array to a subroutine as a parameter.
>Then you'll find out what the array _really_ is.  Try referencing the
>array in the subroutine with the above statement - lots of luck.

	I'm confused.  Please specify language and computational model.
And intended properties of 'array', if possible:  I'm reading 'array'
as a collection of entities of identical type whose relationships to
each other corresponds to a (finite-length) arithmetic sequence, which
sequence elements can be considered 'indices' or 'addresses'.


>What I want is an array that _stays_ an array when I pass it around.

	What properties of an 'array' are being violated when the 'array'
is "passed around"?  Again, please focus.


>[a]rrays in C are not anthing but another name for pointer.

	Arrays in C _are_ arrays.  'char buffer[800]' seems to satisfy my
expectation that I wish an array of 800 'chars', to be later referenced using
the name 'buffer'.

	References to (and into) arrays in C _are_ pointers.

	If a different model is wished on a C platform, it can be hidden within
a data-type using 'typedef' and functions to manipulate that data-type.

	As Mr. Giles implies, those who do not keep straight the difference
will find subtle errors -- or rather, will take a long time finding subtle
errors.  I can testify to that first-, second-, and third-hand.


	As for most of the thread so far, I cannot understand what question
is under consideration, so I refrain from comment.


		Joseph Beckenbach