Return-Path: Delivered-To: new-httpd-archive@hyperreal.org Received: (qmail 1378 invoked by uid 6000); 3 Aug 1998 23:02:05 -0000 Received: (qmail 1338 invoked from network); 3 Aug 1998 23:02:01 -0000 Received: from devsys.jagunet.com (206.156.208.6) by taz.hyperreal.org with SMTP; 3 Aug 1998 23:02:01 -0000 Received: (from jim@localhost) by devsys.jaguNET.com (8.9.1/jag-2.4) id TAA04258 for new-httpd@apache.org; Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:01:56 -0400 (EDT) From: Jim Jagielski Message-Id: <199808032301.TAA04258@devsys.jaguNET.com> Subject: Re: [Fwd: Problem 2534] To: new-httpd@apache.org Date: Mon, 3 Aug 1998 19:01:55 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: from "Alexei Kosut" at Aug 3, 98 03:54:56 pm X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL25] Content-Type: text Sender: new-httpd-owner@apache.org Precedence: bulk Reply-To: new-httpd@apache.org Alexei Kosut wrote: > > (Recall that arrays and pointers are not the same thing in C, no matter > how alike they may act) > Yep... that's why I suggested changing the decalrations from [] to * for the "end_" variables in question... Mostly likely, this would make is clearer to the compiler what we mean. -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski ||| jim@jaguNET.com ||| http://www.jaguNET.com/ "That's no ordinary rabbit... that's the most foul, cruel and bad-tempered rodent you ever laid eyes on"