Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!ubvax!ames!lamaster
From: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Hugh LaMaster)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.fortran
Subject: Re: RE:  An array by any other name. . .
Message-ID: <14997@ames.arc.nasa.gov>
Date: 16 Sep 88 16:20:00 GMT
References: <3641@lanl.gov> <7066@megaron.arizona.edu>
Reply-To: lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov.UUCP (Hugh LaMaster)
Organization: NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
Lines: 19

In article <7066@megaron.arizona.edu> mike@arizona.edu (Mike Coffin) writes:
>the way it's done does have some advantages.  Chiefly, I guess, the
>ability to build data structures that are *not* arrays, but can be
>treated like arrays in many ways.  (Whether these are Good Things is
>an argument I refuse to get into.)

I don't refuse.  Indexing pointers through data structures is the path to
perdition.  What happens when you move your code to a word addressable
machine, or a machine with different alignment rules?  If you write code
that uses this unnecessary "advantage", don't complain when you can't port
it.  Some uses of pointers would make the most dyed-in-the-wool Fortran
EQUIVALENCE abuser blush.


-- 
  Hugh LaMaster, m/s 233-9,  UUCP ames!lamaster
  NASA Ames Research Center  ARPA lamaster@ames.arc.nasa.gov
  Moffett Field, CA 94035     
  Phone:  (415)694-6117