On 11.01.2008, at 15:57, Albrecht Schlosser wrote:
>> No, the line
>>
>> for ( ; *in; out++, in+=2 )
>>
>> could also be written as:
>>
>> while (*in) {
>> ...
>> out++; in+=2;
>> }
>
> ... and (*in) is false for the trailing (or any other) zero byte
> (in the first position of these byte pairs), and thus the zero
> byte wouldn't be copied. Right?
Ohm yes he'd miss writing it, that is correct.
----
http://robowerk.com/
_______________________________________________
fltk mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
