Re: pointer q


"Keith Thompson" <kst-u@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:lnlkt5bqv3.fsf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"Joe Smith" <grumpy196884@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
A recent post of mine showed a sufficiently large gaffe on pointers as to
need to return to K&R 5.1-6 appendix A8.6.1 . So we have type
specifiers:
int
long
. One dreams himself variable names: qwe, qwr, writes

int qwe;
long qwr;

and thinks he knows what types he's declared. Had you asked me about:

int *qwe;
long *qwr;

I would have said the pointers declared were--while pointng to different
types--of the same type. Why am I wrong? Joe

int* and long* are two different types (both pointer types).

I'm curious, what led you to think that they're the same type?

What's to stop me from swapping an int * and a long *? Joe


.

Relevant Pages

  • pointer q
    ... A recent post of mine showed a sufficiently large gaffe on pointers as to ... One dreams himself variable names: qwe, qwr, writes ... int qwe; ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: pointer q
    ... One dreams himself variable names: qwe, qwr, writes ... int qwe; ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: pointer q
    ... qwe, qwr, writes ... int qwe; ... You can do the assignments with explicit conversion, ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: pointer q
    ... qwe, qwr, writes ... int qwe; ... Joe ...
    (comp.lang.c)
  • Re: pointer q
    ... Joe Smith wrote: ... qwe, qwr, writes ... int qwe; ...
    (comp.lang.c)