Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!van-bc!ubc-cs!uw-beaver!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!reed!bowman
From: bowman@reed.UUCP (Eric Bowman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: More on MPW C 3.0 question
Keywords: array, pointers
Message-ID: <14241@reed.UUCP>
Date: 23 Feb 90 07:34:09 GMT
References: <162.25dfe4b3@waikato.ac.nz> <10311@hoptoad.uucp> <1629@sequent.cs.qmw.ac.uk> <25e46fa6.4e8a@polyslo.CalPoly.EDU>
Reply-To: bowman@reed.UUCP (Eric Bowman)
Organization: Reed College, Portland OR
Lines: 20

I'm not a C theoretician, but there is definitely a distinction between
a pointer to a pointer and a pointer to a so-called array.  An array really
is a pointer, but since you never change what an array pointer points to, i.e.
	char	a[5],b[5];

	<code>
	a=b;

it is useful to make a distinction between a pointer in the traditional sense
and a pointer defined as an array.  Thus a pointer to "a", i.e.

	char **c=&a;

is not necessarily mislabled as a "pointer to an array."  In a strictly tech-
nical and sematic environment, I suppose so, but in a practical sense its
meaningful.

BoBo
(bowman@reed.bitnet)
my .sig got trashed.