Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!teddy!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.lang.pascal,net.lang.c
Subject: Re: PASCAL as a system's programming language
Message-ID: <7237@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Fri, 11-Jan-85 18:43:22 EST
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.7237
Posted: Fri Jan 11 18:43:22 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 13-Jan-85 08:23:16 EST
References: <252@harvard.ARPA> <193@ihu1m.UUCP> <24@spar.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 13
Xref: watmath net.lang.pascal:182 net.lang.c:3839

> 2) Notational consistency, especially with structures, arrays and pointers.
> 
> It's unfortunate that C is irrevocably brain-damaged by the lack of
> coherence and clarity as regards item (2). 

How about explaining what you mean.  If you're referring to the
equivalence of
	*(p + i)
and
	p[i]
then I have to disagree.  Otherwise, what notational inconsistency?
Structs (unions), arrays, and pointers are not the same things so
what consistency are you asking for??