> CBFalconer said:

>> James Dow Allen wrote:

>>>

>> ... snip ...

>>>
>>> Fragment #1
>>> int hw(uint64 x) {
>>> uint64 y;
>>>
>>> y = x & (x >> H0);

>>
>> nothing. H0 is undefined.

>
> Chuck, don't you think James *knows* he hasn't defined H0? He's
> not exactly J Random Newbie.

> We have program which prints news.
> Every news contains subject and body text. Also, we count how much was every
> news read. Everytime a news get read, we add 1 to to the value "read".
> Create functions which will print the top 5 of the news, how much in average
> something gets read, and what's the difference between the top news and the
> news in the middle.
>
> Here is some nasty code, I've translated it from Croatian. Hope it makes
> sense.
>
> However, sorting looks pretty nasty and it's written badly. Any suggestions
> in changing?
> I am stuck with the deadline, only tomorrow is left for me for having fun
> with this code.
>
> Thanks in advance.
>

>
> I commonly use pointers to iterate thru an array. For example:
>
> int my_array[X];
>
> int *p = my_array;
> int const *const pend = my_array + sizeof my_array/sizeof*my_array;
>
> do *p++ = 42;
> while (pend != p);
>
> (Yes I realise the lack of spaces in the sizeof thing above is
> disgusting, but I've gotten so sick of writing it out that I make it as
> compact as possible)
>
> I can't count how many times I use this construct in my code every day.
> It's a right pain in the ass to always have to write out the long-winded
> intialiser for pend, so I'm considering switching to initialising pend
> as follows: ...

> Tomás Ó hÉilidhe:

>> Anyway, just wondering what people think of the alternative. Saves me
>> that little rush of pissed-off-ness every time I've to write out the
>> tedious sizeof thing.

>
> A few people have asked me why I just don't write:
>
> int const *const pend = my_array + X;
>
> The reason for this is:
>
> 1) I can't see the declaration or definition for my_array (and I don't
> want to see it). It could be defined in another source file. I don't
> know what macros is used for its length.
>
> 2) The macro that decides the array's length might change. For instance,
> today, the code might be:

> The '-ansi' option tells gcc to adhere to the "C90" Standard, i.e.,
> ISO:9899:1990. It's also called as "C89" or "ANSI C". But strictly
> speaking the last one (ANSI C) is invalid as "ANSI C" now refers to the
> Standard ratified by ANSI currently, which is ISO:9899:1999.

> david wrote:
>

>> Thanks for the help, I used pointer to pointer as a few people
>> suggested.
>>
>> It is my first day with C programming language and I still collecting
>> books, websites and etc. with the most detailed explanation how
>> everything here works. Maybe you could recommend some good material?

>
> The C Programming Language (Second Edition) by Kernighan & Ritchie