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: 103376,2078dddcdcd8d83 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Warning: Religious naming convention discussion :-) [was: assign help!!] Date: 1997/05/13 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 241402642 References: <5kjvcv$evt@news.cis.nctu.edu.tw> Organization: New York University Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1997-05-13T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Bob Duff said <<4. Array indexing is defined in terms of pointer arithmetic. (Well, I admit this is a rather weak reason.)>> Actually I think that's a bit backwards, I would say that pointer arithmetic in C is defined in terms of indexing in some sense. A pointer in C is conceptually a pair (base address, offset), and pointer arithmetic adjusts the offset, which is closely related to an array index. (indeed it is EXACTLY what COBOL would call an array index :-) But I agree with some of your other reasons, although I do not agree that pointers and arrays are synonymous in C, it is just that there are implicit coercions between these two types.