Address of array

[Daniel R. Levy]

In article <150 at sdchema.sdchem.UUCP>, tps at sdchem.UUCP (Tom Stockfisch) writes:
>[]
>Joe Yao replies
>>I don't really see what the problem is that people are moaning
>>about.  If you want a pointer to the array, the array name itself
>>coerces to a pointer containing the memory location at the beginning
>>of the array.  There is no such thing as a pointer to the whole
>>array:  that is a Pasqualische or Fortranian notion.

'Scuse me, can somebody educate me as to why that would be a "Fortranian"
(I withhold opinion on the Pascal allegation) notion?  I was under the
impression that most, if not all, Fortrans implement array references pretty
much the same way that C does:  by reference to the address of the first element
in the array, with offsets computed according to the subscripts and then
automatically dereferenced for use.   The only differences I could see is
in argument passing where C can pass things by value, whereas Fortran must
pass by reference.

        FORTRAN               C

      INTEGER I(1000) <--> int i[1000];
      J = I(50)       <--> int j = i[49];
      I(3) = 8        <--> i[2] = 8;
      CALL FOO(I)     <--> foo(i); /* pass address of first element */
      CALL FOO(I(3))  <--> foo(&i[2]); /* or of another? */
      ...                      ...
      SUBROUTINE FOO(K) <> foo(k)  /* and dereference on the "other side" */
      INTEGER K(1000)      int k[1000]; {
      WRITE(*,*)K(3)       printf("%d\n",k[2]);
      ...                      ...
      END                  }
-- 
 -------------------------------    Disclaimer:  The views contained herein are
|       dan levy | yvel nad      |  my own and are not at all those of my em-
|         an engihacker @        |  ployer or the administrator of any computer
| at&t computer systems division |  upon which I may hack.
|        skokie, illinois        |
 --------------------------------   Path: ..!{akgua,homxb,ihnp4,ltuxa,mvuxa,
						vax135}!ttrdc!levy