What was the reasoning behind not explicitly storing an array's length with an array in
The way I see it, there are overwhelming reasons to do so but not very many in support of the standard (C89). For instance:
- Having length available in a buffer can prevent buffer overrun.
- A Java-style
arr.lengthis both clear and avoids the programmer from having to maintain many
ints on the stack if dealing with several arrays
- Function parameters become more cogent.
But perhaps the most motivating reason, in my opinion, is that usually, no space is saved without keeping the length. I would venture to say that most uses of arrays involve dynamic allocation. True, there may be some cases where people use an array allocated on the stack, but that's just one function call* - the stack can handle 4 or 8 bytes extra.
Since the heap manager has to track the free block size used up by the dynamically allocated array anyway, why not make that information usable (and add the additional rule, checked at compile time, that one can't manipulate the length explicitly unless one would like to shoot oneself in the foot).
The only thing I can think of on the other side is that no length tracking may have made compilers simpler, but not that much simpler.
*Technically, one could write some kind of recursive function with an array with automatic storage, and in this (very elaborate) case storing the length may indeed result in effectively more space usage.
malloc()ed area be requested in a portable way?" That's a thing which makes me wonder several times.