comp.std.c

[Doug Gwyn]

In article <619 at targon.UUCP> andre at targon.UUCP (andre) writes:
>Does this mean that on OS/2 on an '386 with a buffer gotten from
>the system, the compiler sees to it that the char *head does never!
>ends up in an address register?

I'm not familiar enough with that environment to answer definitively,
but I don't understand the problem.  The whole reason the Standard
does not guarantee array[0]-1 is to accommodate such address space issues.
The reason it does guarantee array[last]+1 is because otherwise looping
would be painful; since only a single byte (or maybe word) extra is
required at the end, the compiler should arrange for the extra slop
and all will be well.