home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!agate!agate!matt
- From: matt@physics2.berkeley.edu (Matt Austern)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
- Subject: Re: Passing 2-d arrys to functions
- Date: 8 Jan 93 11:11:48
- Organization: Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (Theoretical Physics Group)
- Lines: 22
- Message-ID: <MATT.93Jan8111148@physics2.berkeley.edu>
- References: <C0Hw4n.Hy9@knot.ccs.queensu.ca> <C0H9sA.BGw@newsserver.technet.sg>
- <24568@alice.att.com> <726521188snx@trmphrst.demon.co.uk>
- Reply-To: matt@physics.berkeley.edu
- NNTP-Posting-Host: physics2.berkeley.edu
- In-reply-to: nikki@trmphrst.demon.co.uk's message of 8 Jan 93 12:26:28 GMT
-
- In article <726521188snx@trmphrst.demon.co.uk> nikki@trmphrst.demon.co.uk (Nikki Locke) writes:
-
- > The confusion between pointers and arrays in C (and C++) is one of the
- > tricky bits. Fervent C++ purists have even been know to say that array
- > handling in C++ is completely broken (because it is like that in C), and
- > should rarely be used.
-
- I happen to be of this opinion. I believe that a well-designed array
- class is essential, and should be part of the C++ Standard Library.
- (Actually, make that several well-designed array classes; probably the
- right solution is to have one class for one-dimensional arrays, and
- another for multi-dimensional arrays.) Now that templates are part of
- the language, this is more practical than it used to be.
-
- I've written my own array classes (I imagine that we all have), but it
- would be nice if I could count on arrays being there in every
- implementation.
- --
- Matthew Austern Just keep yelling until you attract a
- (510) 644-2618 crowd, then a constituency, a movement, a
- austern@lbl.bitnet faction, an army! If you don't have any
- matt@physics.berkeley.edu solutions, become a part of the problem!
-