16 Oct
2011
16 Oct
'11
12:38 p.m.
On 16 Oct 2011 at 12:00, Eric Smith wrote:
The difficulty that arises from that is that you
can't have a C pointer to one of those bits (unless a new kind of C
pointer is invented), and that it breaks the semantics of the indexing
(square bracket) and dereferencing (unary *) operators.
But--C is implemented on systems without byte addressing, as
previously noted, where the smallest addressable unit is the word.
Ultimately the smallest item of data on any machine (save decimal
ones) is the bit and addresses should reflect that.
What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander...
You begin to understand those who think that explicit pointers are
just plain evil... :)
--Chuck