Problem with Array size

[CBFalconer]

I believe you are thinking of TC 2.0. There never was a Turbo C 3.0,
they combined C and C++ into one product after TC 2.01 I believe.

You are absolutely right. I goofed.

 

[Default User]

Default User wrote:

You are absolutely right. I goofed.

I still have my TC 2.0 manual. I used that for a long time.




Brian

 

[Antoninus Twink]

I still have my TC 2.0 manual. I used that for a long time.

Must bookmark this little exchange for the next time "Chuckie" or The
Loser decide to lay into Jacob for answering a question about lcc-win.

Hypocrites, them? Surely not.

 

[Richard]

Must bookmark this little exchange for the next time "Chuckie" or The
Loser decide to lay into Jacob for answering a question about lcc-win.

Hypocrites, them? Surely not.

This group is rapidly going down the toilet. I have taught people, as
part of my role as a techy/pm/architect over years and have generally
had very good feedback and people pick things up quickly. The pointer
debate has left me speechless. Even stating clearly "on my machine" and
showing the resulting numbers and the code these idiots STILL tell me
the pointer address has not increased by 4. Unbelievable. The worst is
they KNOW I understand the abstract nature and how C does pointer
arithmetic in "units pointed to" but they still deny the physical
realities of the physical numbers/addresses on a real world system. This
constant joshing between the regs to see who can be the most obscure and
intellectual is so bad for the group in general its not funny.