From 9ac6feb5dea5139c1b0cd67b99d00a1560a8a21b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Richard Stallman Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2024 10:22:25 -0400 Subject: [PATCH] Fix typos. (Array Params are Ptrs): Renamed from Array Parm Pointer. --- c.texi | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/c.texi b/c.texi index a06538a..07946da 100644 --- a/c.texi +++ b/c.texi @@ -3599,8 +3599,8 @@ too is not really associative. However, the GCC option order of calculation when an associative operation (associative in exact mathematics) combines several operands. The option takes effect when compiling a module (@pxref{Compilation}). Changing the order -of association can enable GCC to optiimize the floating-point -ooerations better. +of association can enable GCC to optimize the floating-point +operations better. In all these examples, the four function calls can be done in any order. There is no right or wrong about that. @@ -3684,7 +3684,7 @@ x = x++ @noindent @code{x} will certainly be incremented but the incremented value may be replaced with the old value. That's because the incrementation and -the assignment may occur in either oder. If the incrementation of +the assignment may occur in either order. If the incrementation of @code{x} occurs after the assignment to @code{x}, the incremented value will remain in place. But if the incrementation happens first, the assignment will put the not-yet-incremented value back into @@ -4948,7 +4948,7 @@ Here's how to determine the number of elements in an array The expression @code{sizeof arr} gives the size of the array, not the size of a pointer to an element. However, if @var{expression} is a function parameter that was declared as an array, that -variable really has a pointer type (@pxref{Array Parm Pointer}), so +variable really has a pointer type (@pxref{Array Params are Ptrs}), so the result is the size of that pointer. @item sizeof (@var{type}) @@ -6622,7 +6622,7 @@ struct record r1, r2; @end example @noindent -structure assigment such as @code{r1 = r2} copies array fields' +structure assignment such as @code{r1 = r2} copies array fields' contents just as it copies all the other fields. This is the only way in C that you can operate on the whole contents @@ -10406,12 +10406,12 @@ them. So they cannot be passed as arguments like other values. a special way. @menu -* Array Parm Pointer:: +* Array Params are Ptrs:: * Passing Array Args:: * Array Parm Qualifiers:: @end menu -@node Array Parm Pointer +@node Array Params are Ptrs @subsubsection Array parameters are pointers Declaring a function parameter variable as an array really gives it a