Hacker News Reader

Comment by IncreasePosts | Hacker News Reader

Paging walter bright

At your service! D fixed it, and I'm sorry C users have suffered as the array-to-pointer decay blasted their kingdom. Fixing it in C is easy and should be the #1 priority.

At this point, C's #1 priority is not breaking things in existing implementations, though, Walter...

My proposal does not break existing code.

https://www.digitalmars.com/articles/C-biggest-mistake.html

Yes it does:

>All it needs is a little new syntax

You seem to be under the impression that adding new syntax necessarily breaks existing code. But that just isn't true. If you can't fathom how it's done, then look at the use VERSION statement in Perl.

It doesn't just break existing code, it breaks existing tooling for checking syntax ..

(Perl is hardly a decent model.)

This answer that is both so stupendously confident and wrong is only possible if you in actuality decided to not read and understand how this problem is solved in Perl.

C's biggest mistake.

But in other news most don't know that a[3] == 3[a]

Even more irrelevant than the array type

I didn't understand why a[3] == 3[a], but i found this stackoverflow that explains it.

https://stackoverflow.com/a/16163840

In C a[i] is converted to *(a+i) internally. i[a] is converted to *(i+a). Array names also act as pointers in c. so (a+i) or (i+a) give an address (using pointer arithmetic) that is dereferenced using

In C a[i] is converted to *(a+i) internally. i[a] is converted to *(i+a). Array names also act as pointers in c. so (a+i) or (i+a) give an address (using pointer arithmetic) that is dereferenced using *

https://www.digitalmars.com/articles/C-biggest-mistake.html

Reply on news.ycombinator.com