Search Results

Yeah, I know, and I have used tightly typed languages a time or two (just) and found the discipline too hard to take. You have to start at the very basest of fundamentals with a strongly typed...

At the time that I posted it, I did know that assigning to an array was bad, but I didn't think/know/relying-on-memory that I was doing so. In subsequent investigation (while waiting for helpful...

Thank you, Achenle, for reiterating this point. This point was made in the original post. Obviously, the constant address that is symbolized by the name of the member cannot be changed. The...

Don, a million thanks for your cogent reply.

'Pon our systems, NULL the pointer is defined as (void *)0. NUL the character is (char)0. This is why I have been saying, as you do below, it would...

As I pointed out in my reply to @jimmacnamara, there was no overflow. By means of logic that is not obvious to me, the compiler made certain decisions, which resulted in two things:

1. The data...

Thanks for your input, Jim (quoted below).

Things to note: my understanding was that each comma-separated initializer was taken to be THE data for EACH individual structure member, not just...

Situation:
I have an array of structures:
struct my_struct_type {
char tags_sn[5];
char group_c;
char is_err_c;
};
struct my_struct_type stuff[] = {
...