Trying to decide which programming language I want to learn

[hmmm27]

The compiler would reject the 0++ incrementation directive inside the brackets of the a[0++] expression because 0 is not a variable.

I'll take your word for it but, as long as the context is only iteration and not re-iteration (ie: it doesn't need to be rezeroed), it saves a superflous explicit declaration.

 

[pbuk]

I'll take your word for it but, as long as the context is only iteration and not re-iteration (ie: it doesn't need to be rezeroed), it saves a superflous explicit declaration.

What's wrong with a[1]?

 

[jtbell]

unsigned i = 0;
while (i < dynArr.size())
{         
      num = dynArr[i++];
      count << num << " ";// display all the numbers until the end.         
}

This is of course also a common application for a traditional for-loop:

for (int i = 0; i < dynArr.size(); i++)
{
    count << dynArr[i] << " ";
}

Or in a modern (post 2011) version of C++, a range-based for-loop:

for (int num : dynArr)
{
    count << num << " ";
}

 

[hmmm27]

What's wrong with a[1]?

Nothing, if your purpose is to explicitly access the second element in an array. In what context were you comparing it to a hypothetical a[0++] statement ?

 

[Mark44]

What's wrong with a[1]?

Nothing, if your purpose is to explicitly access the second element in an array. In what context were you comparing it to a hypothetical a[0++] statement ?

I believe pbuk was referring to this post of yours, #380:

wouldn't be surprised if a c compiler accepted, and processed properly, something to the effect of a[0++]

There's nothing hypothetical about a[0++]. It just flat won't compile.

 

[Mark44]

This thread is getting very long, with just under 400 posts. @yungman, when you have another question, please start a new thread.

 

[yungman]

Thank guys, my big boss just had a hip replacement yesterday and she's home. I am too busy right now to read the replies right now. I'll get to it later tonight or tomorrow.

thanks

 

[Mark44]

I'm closing this thread now. If anyone other than the OP (@yungman) feels the need to reply to a post here, please let me know, and I'll reopen it temporarily.