Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watnot!watmath!clyde!cuae2!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!uxc.cso.uiuc.edu!uicsrd!konigsfe
From: konigsfe@uicsrd.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: Bug in Microsoft C 4.00?
Message-ID: <42900003@uicsrd>
Date: Sun, 15-Feb-87 17:09:00 EST
Article-I.D.: uicsrd.42900003
Posted: Sun Feb 15 17:09:00 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 18-Feb-87 21:57:30 EST
References: <216700008@orstcs>
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:orstcs:216700008:uicsrd:42900003:000:1124
Nf-From: uicsrd.CSRD.UIUC.EDU!konigsfe    Feb 15 16:09:00 1987


>	printf("address of array1 is %x, end of array1 is %x\n",
>		array1, array1+sizeof(array1));

As I see it, there is nothing wrong with the compiler or linker
but just your (or maybe its mine) perception of what the compiler is
doing.  In the above code array1 was an array of integers with 100
elements.  This gives it a size of 200 bytes.  It appears that
array1+sizeof(array1) should give the address of array1 plus 200, but
the compiler will assume that you are giving an offset to an integer
pointer, array1,  and really add 2 for every integer offset.  
In other words the compiler multiplies the pointer offset (sizeof(array1)) 
by the size of element pointed to by array1 (sizeof(int) = 2) and 
therefore adds 400 instead of 200.  

If this explination is wrong, please let me know because much of my
code will need to be reevaluated. 

Disclaimer:  I don't claim to be smart, I've just failed enough times
to make me learn. 

Kris Konigsfeld
UUCP:	 {ihnp4,seismo,pur-ee,convex}!uiucdcs!uicsrd!konigsfe
ARPANET: konigsfe%uicsrd@a.cs.uiuc.edu
CSNET:	 konigsfe%uicsrd@uiuc.csnet
BITNET:	 konigsfe@uicsrd.csrd.uiuc.edu