It's not the same as (index + arr). arr is a pointer to the beginning address of a series of particular "types". These types have a specific size in memory. Index increments the pointer by (n * size_of(type)).
I don't know what I was on. Proof positive that sleep depravation does not give me more time to be "productive". Thanks for the correction and apologies for my mistake.
Comments
It's not the same as (index + arr). arr is a pointer to the beginning address of a series of particular "types". These types have a specific size in memory. Index increments the pointer by (n * size_of(type)).
arr[index] == arr + (n * size_of(type)) == (n * size_of(type)) + *arr
He said it's the same as
which is correct.C pointer arithmetic already accounts for object sizes.
And it's sizeof, not size_of. And
is completely different from And it's a series of "values".I don't know what I was on. Proof positive that sleep depravation does not give me more time to be "productive". Thanks for the correction and apologies for my mistake.
Always time for a refresher :) http://augustcouncil.com/~tgibson/tutorial/arr.html