> for (j = N; j > 0 && j--;)
This is an extremely strange for-loop header, and I wonder if
it is what the author(s) really intended. I _think_ it might
be equivalent to
for (j = N; j > 0 && j != 0; /*no step action*/) {
j--;
/* now the rest of the loop body */
}
j--; /* because the condition is consulted 1 more time than the
loop body runs */
so there isn't necessarily an overrun at j = N.
I wonder if it would not be cleaner to use a standard idiom:
for (j = N-1; j >= 0; j--)
IMO even a C language lawyer would have a hard time figuring out
what the exact behaviour is here, which doesn't bode well for
end-user understanding of the code.
You might want to try Valgrind's Memcheck tool to see if there
are in fact any overruns happening.
J
_______________________________________________
Bug-gsl mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gsl
