Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!jarthur!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!wuarchive!cs.utexas.edu!rutgers!cmcl2!kramden.acf.nyu.edu!brnstnd
From: brnstnd@kramden.acf.nyu.edu (Dan Bernstein)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc
Subject: Re: Answers, Chapter 2: to point or not to point
Message-ID: <1622:Nov606:57:0190@kramden.acf.nyu.edu>
Date: 6 Nov 90 06:57:01 GMT
References: <14271@goofy.megatest.UUCP> <3652@lanl.gov>
Organization: IR
Lines: 12

In article <3652@lanl.gov> jlg@lanl.gov (Jim Giles) writes:
>       x(1,:) = x(2,:)
  [ easy to see that there's no aliasing ]
  [ C version it's much harder, especially with the rows flipped ]

Jim, I sympathize with the point you're trying to make, but this has
absolutely nothing to do with pointers. If language L has array slicing
and array assignment, then it will understand the above statement
directly, and can optimize just as easily as Fortran. Pointers never
appear.

---Dan