home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: ix.netcom.com!netnews
- From: miker3@ix.netcom.com (Mike Rubenstein)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
- Subject: Re: start array at k, not 0
- Date: Tue, 09 Jan 1996 11:35:01 GMT
- Organization: Netcom
- Message-ID: <30f252c7.291628416@nntp.ix.netcom.com>
- References: <Pine.OSF.3.91.960104095358.22268B-100000@io.UWinnipeg.ca> <820787486snz@genesis.demon.co.uk> <Pine.OSF.3.91.960105091211.2861B-100000@io.UWinnipeg.ca> <4cpdt3$3b5@newdelph.cig.mot.com> <30f06d21.167303296@nntp.ix.netcom.com> <tbutler.821142000@laraby.tiac.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-dc9-02.ix.netcom.com
- X-NETCOM-Date: Tue Jan 09 3:34:12 AM PST 1996
- X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99c/16.141
-
- tbutler@laraby.tiac.net (Tim Butler) wrote:
-
- |>miker3@ix.netcom.com (Mike Rubenstein) writes:
- |>[ Numerical Recipes method of array indexing referenced ]
- |>....
- |>:It's unfortunate that the authors of this book didn't bother to
- learn
- |>:C before writing it. As anyone who has read the FAQ [6.13] knows,
- |>:this results in undefined behavior.
- |>...
- |>
- |>They have addressed that in the second edition. To retain the
- ability
- |>to start indexing at one, they "waste" that first element. They
- |>allocate one element extra.
-
- The quote I gave was from the second edition.
-
- Michael M Rubenstein
-