From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID,
	REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,fbe747283d8e6afc
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <nospam@gsg.eds.com>
Subject: Re: More like *p versus p[0]
Date: 1997/12/02
Message-ID: <34847265.3DD8@gsg.eds.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 294692864
References: <65evej$cph$1@mer-news.ctron.com>
Organization: EDS MS
Reply-To: nospam@gsg.eds.com
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Date: 1997-12-02T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


vo@ctron.com wrote:
> 
> If you really have a problem with using *p
> then you should use p[0]. Never, never
> underestimate  C 's expressiveness.

Actually, that's another thing that I consider to be a serious defect in
C.

-- 

                        Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
                        Senior Software SE

The values in from and reply-to are for the benefit of spammers:
reply to domain eds.com, user msustys1.smetz or to domain gsg.eds.com,
user smetz. Do not reply to spamtrap@library.lspace.org