Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!rutgers!bellcore!faline!thumper!ulysses!andante!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP (Andrew Koenig)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Another silly question
Message-ID: <9251@alice.UUCP>
Date: 27 Apr 89 14:33:11 GMT
References: pointer array reference access element <2459@nmtsun.nmt.edu>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ
Lines: 32

In article <2459@nmtsun.nmt.edu>, kelly@nmtsun.nmt.edu (Sean Kelly) writes:

> My CS instructor and I disagree about a certain moot point.  I have a text
> book which says that

> 	*(a + i)	and	a[i]

> are equivalent, given an array a, and int index i ... each gives the
> value stored in a[i].  But he says that

> 	*(a + i)

> is non-standard and would not expect it do go far on all _real_ C compilers

You are right, *(a + i) is precisely equivalent to a[i].
Any compiler that gets that wrong is badly broken.

Moreover, many programs say

	a + i

instead of

	&a[i]

so there is a fair premium on getting at least that part of it right.

You might ask your instructor for an example of a compiler that
doesn't get *(a + i) right.
-- 
				--Andrew Koenig
				  ark@europa.att.com