Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<86ed6po09k.fsf@linuxsc.com> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> Newsgroups: comp.lang.c Subject: Re: relearning C: why does an in-place change to a char* segfault? Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 16:05:11 -0700 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 28 Message-ID: <86ed6po09k.fsf@linuxsc.com> References: <IoGcndcJ1Zm83zb7nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <v8fhhl$232oi$1@dont-email.me> <v8fn2u$243nb$1@dont-email.me> <87jzh0gdru.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <v8gte2$2ceis$2@dont-email.me> <20240801174256.890@kylheku.com> <v8i9o8$2oof8$1@dont-email.me> <v8j808$2us0r$1@dont-email.me> <864j7oszhu.fsf@linuxsc.com> <v9if6v$fs3n$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Injection-Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2024 01:05:12 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7281b2582241b74932977c55e2504530"; logging-data="1184676"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+tPQUUvBFuDTq4IS9DzcYKvCfnj5i5G6M=" User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:NbnLAbiRsHWhj3pvWGuZ4YqIccU= sha1:UqxAP4g6wfML/Zv6h08C3fToyE4= Bytes: 2483 James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: > Tim Rentsch <tr.17687@z991.linuxsc.com> writes: > >> James Kuyper <jameskuyper@alumni.caltech.edu> writes: >> >>> Just as 1 is an integer literal whose value cannot be modified, >>> [...] >> >> The C language doesn't have integer literals. C has string >> literals, and compound literals, and it has integer constants. >> But C does not have integer literals. > > True, but C++ does, and it means the same thing by "integer literal" > that C means by "integer constant". This is comp.lang.c, not comp.lang.c++. You flog Bart for using C-standard-defined terms wrongly. This case is no different. > C doesn't define the term "integer > literal" with any conflicting meaning, and my use of the C++ terminology > allowed me to make the parallel with string literals clearer, so I don't > see any particular problem with my choice of words. In this case you are in the wrong. Just be a man and admit it. Oh, I forgot, your rhetorical religion doesn't allow you to admit any linguistic imperfection, so you try to sleaze your way to a different subject so you can continue to argue.