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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/01/25 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 212159349 references: <5bie2d$eat$1@news.nyu.edu> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1997-01-25T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Richard said, replying to me >>equally if you do something like >> >> (x = p; x < &p[10]; p += 3) >> >>you can find you have an infinite loop, all quite in accordance with the >>C semantics, although somewhat surprising. > >This case must work. Such a reference to the end of an object is required >to be treated like a reference within the object. (note, the p += 3 should of course be x += 3, as I noted in a followup post, but I assume Richard understands this typo) Chuckle, chuckle, it is nice to be able to catch Richard out like this :-) Richard, you did not look at the example carefully enough. The fact that you think it works even after I warned that it does not is a perfect example of how serious this pitfall is! > (x = p; x < &p[10]; x += 3) The problem in my example is that I am bumping x by 3 each time. Sure it would work if the 3 is replaced by 1, because of the special kludge in the ANSI standard to allow &p[10] but the increment of 3 causes the value of x to be further past the end of the array, and this is not required to work.