Posted by Jerry Stuckle on 12/31/07 13:37

Michael Fesser wrote:
> .oO(Steve)
>
>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:mJidnRYAhdsKJO7anZ2dnUVZ_sbinZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
>>> Wrong again, Stevie. A C++ pointer is not the same as a C++ reference.
>>> And C doesn't have references, just as PHP doesn't have pointers.
>>>
>>>> in php, a reference (or byref) behaves *IDENTICALLY* to a c/c++ pointer.
>>>> there are somethings that you cannot do with this reference in php that
>>>> you could in other languages, however, the nature of the beast is the
>>>> same. i know that a reference in php is really just an alias of the
>>>> symbol table entry, but really that just seems a matter of symantics to
>>>> me. i don't care where things are stored at such a low level when i'm
>>>> writing in a scripting language. i care about behaviors.
>>>>
>>> Wrong again. They behave much differently.
>> read, jerry, read. show me how in *PHP* the behavior is different.
>
> All these things can't be done with references as they exist in PHP:
>
> * pointer arithmetics
> * pointer pointers
> * working with the pointer itself or the value it points to (which is
> the basis for the first two things)
> * ...
>
> There are _no_ pointers in PHP. A reference is _not_ a pointer.
>
> And since PHP references behave identically to C++ references (both are
> symbol table alias names), your statement above would also mean that C++
> references behave identically to pointers as well. Would you tell that
> to a C++ programmer?
>
> Micha
>

Hi, Micha,

Forget Stevie. He's not worth it.

A more appropriate place for him would be alt.stoopid.trolls instead of
someplace real programmers hang out.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

[Back to original message]