Hi Ingo,
> What you described as a pointer to a 2x3 array of immutable pointers
> to strings might be
> char **const (*gbrs_evil)[2][3]
> But as i said, it is evil, so maybe i'm wrong, too.
It's really not that evil.
char **const (*gbrs_evil)[2][3]
gbrs_evil is a gbrs_evil
pointer to *
array of 2 [2]
array of 3 [3]
const const
pointer to *
pointer to *
char char
> that "char const = const char" is *not* what is causing the real
> difficulty here, but merely a minor, trivial curiosity near the
> sideline.
I think those struggling with Andersons' `right left' rule, or
equivalent, will probably find that const being allowed to shift
position but not meaning is significant compared to those of us that
have `got it'. If unary minus could come before or after in arithmetic,
I think it would also trouble. `-3+-1+-4' → `-3+1-+4-'.
> char *const *my_evil[2][3];
> What is sizeof(my_evil), sizeof(*my_evil),
The size of the six elements, and the size of three of them.
> sizeof(gbrs_evil), and sizeof(*gbrs_evil)?
The size of a pointer to that array's elements, and the size of six
elements.
> That particular syntax possibly isn't K&R&T's most outstanding
> achievement...
No, though Ken did make it logical, it's just understanding the logic!
:-) When he was one of Go's three authors, they made declarations read
left to right.
var foo *[2][3]**byte
--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy
