Thomas said:
Are you sure you want to do this?
No I'm not sure. What do you think?
Advances the pointer after d1
I'm sure you are correct - but I can't tell .. but I've no idea what
your point is. *c1 is now "OW"
Again - I'm sure you are correct ... but what are you talking about?
g++ isn't complaining.
Again - I can't disagree ... cause I've no idea what you are talking
about.
Someone else posted this ... I added two lines at the top ... the
program compiles and appears to run in g++. I'm having trouble parsing
your post. Again, I'm sure your are correct - but I've no idea what you
are saying?
And does not work. You should better use std::string and std::vector.
Ok ... I'm not saying your wrong.
But I beg to take issue with your verbage.
It does indeed work.
$ g++ -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-redhat-linux
Configured with: ../configure --prefix=/usr --mandir=/usr/share/man
--infodir=/usr/share/info --enable-shared --enable-threads=posix
--enable-checking=release --with-system-zlib --enable-__cxa_atexit
--disable-libunwind-exceptions --enable-libgcj-multifile
--enable-languages=c,c++,objc,java,f95,ada --enable-java-awt=gtk
--with-java-home=/usr/lib/jvm/java-1.4.2-gcj-1.4.2.0/jre
--host=i386-redhat-linux
Thread model: posix
gcc version 4.0.2 20051125 (Red Hat 4.0.2-8)
$ g++ -o test.exe test3.cpp
$ ./test.exe
1
2
3
YOU
OU
U
[zentdd@s5 cpp]$
Maybe you have some mystical notion about _your_ understanding or
definition of the word WORK.
If so - maybe thats all I'd need to clarify what you're talking about.
I don't know if its portable. I don't know if it works all the time
everywhwere. I don't know if its to spec. I don't know if its
dangerous. I don't claim any of those things. And I think it would
likely be impossible to prove many such things via formal proof.
So again - I'm sure that given your definition of the word "Work" - you
are correct. But given the context of your statement - I'm at a loss
for what you are talking about.
Imagine a student compiling this program, running it - turning it in --
and the teacher claiming "it doesn't work - use .... instead." and
givng the student an F.
And how about ... "are you sure you want to do this?" "advances the
pointer" "will do bad things" "even worser".
Does that teach the student anything?
Your post was just noise. The only people that know what you're talking
about ... already knew what you were talking about -- if indeed, you
said anything worth talking about.