> (It is most certainly not about a fancy way of getting a pointer to the first element after the array, since this pointer has a completely different type.)
Have to be careful there. Going more than one after the end of the array is undefined (see 6.17):
Actually, that whole FAQ should be of interest to anyone who liked this article. No matter how many times I read through it, I seem to find something new.
Have to be careful there. Going more than one after the end of the array is undefined (see 6.17):
http://c-faq.com/~scs/cgi-bin/faqcat.cgi?sec=aryptr
Actually, that whole FAQ should be of interest to anyone who liked this article. No matter how many times I read through it, I seem to find something new.