On Mon, Apr 7, 2008 at 10:01 PM, Michael FIG <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > > "Dan Amelang" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > >> > ((oop *)self->v__oops)[i]= *((oop **)v__value)[i]; > > [...] > > > > Sorry to sound clueless, but if the line in question makes the C array > > containing "..." be the contents of the Array object, why is the > > following "for" loop necessary? > > It replaces each _oops element by its dereferenced value, equivalent > to (watch the stars): > > ((oop *)self->v__oops)[i] = *((oop **)self->v__oops)[i]; > > Don't ask me why _value is being reused instead of the > freshly-allocated _oops. It would make more sense to me to omit > "_oops := _value", and save 1 line out of the 10,000 quota. ;)
Along with saving a line (yea big deal), I think it would have made a little more sense that way. The reuse of the parameter value was throwing me off. Seeing the same memory address casted two different ways and overriding itself all in one line was bizarre for me. Especially after memory had already been freshly allocated for the oops array. But to each his own. Thanks Mike. Dan _______________________________________________ fonc mailing list [email protected] http://vpri.org/mailman/listinfo/fonc
