Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!cmcl2!adm!smoke!gwyn
From: gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: pointer sizes
Message-ID: <16162@smoke.brl.mil>
Date: 15 May 91 21:47:02 GMT
References: <1991May4.062007.3264@weyrich.UUCP> <16071@smoke.brl.mil> <wolfram.674309645@akela>
Organization: U.S. Army Ballistic Research Laboratory, APG, MD.
Lines: 15

In article <wolfram.674309645@akela> wolfram@akela.informatik.rwth-aachen.de (Wolfram Roesler) writes:
>gwyn@smoke.brl.mil (Doug Gwyn) writes:
>>>that the declaration char **ch; is equivalent to char *ch;
>>No, they're not at all equivalent.  They might not even have the same size.
>His response to this was:
>	"I claim there are no machines like this"
>What do you gurus say about this?

I say that any fool can make arbitrary claims; they need not be given credence.

>How about an example of a machine or OS where this is true?

We've done that over and over in the C newsgroups.
It is really trivial to imagine a reasonable implementation like that;
just consider a word-addressable machine with a maximal address space.