Zero-length static array spec

Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Sun Feb 1 07:11:07 PST 2015


On 1 February 2015 at 14:54, ketmar via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Sun, 01 Feb 2015 14:42:31 +0000, Stefan Frijters wrote:
>
>> It does not seem to say whether a zero-length array should have a valid
>> address or not.
>
> i believe that zero-length array should not be `null`, as it's
> "infinitely small", yet not "non-existent". at least this is what my
> logic tells me.

Infinitely small:
Smaller than the smallest thing ever and then some more. Much smaller
than that in fact, really amazingly insignificant, a totally
unimpressive size, real 'wow, that's small', time.  Infinitely small
is just so small that by comparison, smallness itself looks really
humongous.  Miniscule divided by meager divided by staggeringly
infinitesimal is the sort of concept we're trying to get across here.

:-)


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list