And while the (*array_ptr)[3] notation take a moment to get used to, it is very logical. If you have a pointer to an array, you dereference it first and then indx into it. Again, useful for bounds checking: https://godbolt.org/z/ao1so9KP7
And if you want 'int **a[a][b]', it's a value that when you say 'x = **a[m][n]', will evaluate to an int and assign it to x. Postfix has higher precedence than prefix.
This is one of the things that I feel is an inappropriate abstraction that is around for historical reasons. When I do FFI to call C from rust, I usually wrap the generated API (Which is pointer based) into rust's &[] array syntax. Arrays/lists/Vecs etc in most non-C languages feel like an abstraction over a collection of items; I feel like C's exposing the pointer directly is taking a low-level memory/MMIO operation and inserting it into business logic. Conceptually, I like to keep them separate; pointers for writing drivers, accessing registers, writing to flash memory etc. Arrays/lists/vecs for higher level operations on collections.
Tangent: I have a pet theory that part of Zig's raison d'etre is to fix some of the problems with C, while accommodating its pointer-based data structures, and the resulting patterns.
Learning to program with pointers is enormously useful. It's simply bad software engineering to not use typing to enforce constraints on access to pointers (or addresses, or however you'd like to term them)
Embedded programming is still in C for a lot of micro controllers and whatnot. If you’re programming with limited resources it’s essential to understand pointers and arrays. Likely you won’t be doing anything useful without them
https://godbolt.org/z/PzcjW4zKK
And while the (*array_ptr)[3] notation take a moment to get used to, it is very logical. If you have a pointer to an array, you dereference it first and then indx into it. Again, useful for bounds checking: https://godbolt.org/z/ao1so9KP7
Not sure why, maybe it doesn't feel like C anymore, maybe it feels hacky?
typically if you're passed an array you'd want to get more anyway, so you'd get passed a struct. Not sure.
Tangent: I have a pet theory that part of Zig's raison d'etre is to fix some of the problems with C, while accommodating its pointer-based data structures, and the resulting patterns.
https://www.hytradboi.com/2025/05c72e39-c07e-41bc-ac40-85e83...
But in other news most don't know that a[3] == 3[a]