Return to Answer

True, but it's a subtle difference. Essentially, the former:

char amessage[] = "now is the time";

Defines an array whose members live in the current scope's stack space, whereas:

char *pmessage = "now is the time";

Defines a pointer that lives in the current scope's stack space, but that references memory elsewhere (in this one, "now is the time" is stored elsewhere in memory, commonly a string table).

Also, note that because the data belonging to the second definition (the explicit pointer) is not stored in the current scope's stack space, it is unspecified exactly where it will be stored and should not be modified.

Edit: As pointed out by Mark, GMan, and Pavel, there is also a difference when the address-of operator is used on either of these variables. For instance, &pmessage returns a pointer of type char**, or a pointer to a pointer to chars, whereas &amessage returns a pointer of type char(*)[16], or a pointer to an array of 16 chars (which, like a char**, needs to be dereferenced twice as litb points out).

True, but it's a subtle difference. Essentially, the former:

char amessage[] = "now is the time";

Defines an array whose members live in the current scope's stack space, whereas:

char *pmessage = "now is the time";

Defines a pointer that lives in the current scope's stack space, but that references memory elsewhere (in this one, "now is the time" is stored elsewhere in memory, commonly a string table).

Also, note that because the data belonging to the second definition (the explicit pointer) is not stored in the current scope's stack space, it is unspecified exactly where it will be stored and should not be modified.

As pointed out by Mark, GMan, and Pavel, there is also a difference when the address-of operator is used on either of these variables. For instance, &pmessage returns a pointer of type char**, or a pointer to a pointer to chars, whereas &amessage returns a pointer of type char(*)[16], or a pointer to an array of 16 chars (which, like a char**, needs to be dereferenced twice as litb points out).

True, but it's a subtle difference. Essentially, the former:

char amessage[] = "now is the time";

Defines an array whose members live in the current scope's stack space, whereas:

char *pmessage = "now is the time";

Defines a pointer that lives in the current scope's stack space, but that references memory elsewhere (in this one, "now is the time" is stored elsewhere in memory, commonly a string table).

Also, note that because the data belonging to the second definition (the explicit pointer) is not stored in the current scope's stack space, it is unspecified exactly where it will be stored and should not be modified.

Edit: As pointed out by Mark, GMan, and Pavel, there is also a difference when the address-of operator is used on either of these variables. For instance, &pmessage returns a pointer of type char**, or a pointer to a pointer to chars, whereas &amessage returns a pointer of type char(*)[16], or a pointer to an array of 16 chars.

True, but it's a subtle difference. Essentially, the former:

char amessage[] = "now is the time";

Defines an array whose members live in the current scope's stack space, whereas:

char *pmessage = "now is the time";

Defines a pointer that lives in the current scope's stack space, but that references memory elsewhere (in this one, "now is the time" is stored elsewhere in memory, commonly a string table).

Also, note that because the data belonging to the second definition (the explicit pointer) is not stored in the current scope's stack space, it is unspecified exactly where it will be stored and should not be modified.

Edit: As pointed out by Mark, GMan, and Pavel, there is also a difference when the address-of operator is used on either of these variables. For instance, &pmessage returns a pointer of type char**, or a pointer to a pointer to chars, whereas &amessage returns a pointer of type char(*)[16], or a pointer to an array of 16 chars (which, like a char**, needs to be dereferenced twice as litb points out).

True, but it's a subtle difference. Essentially, the former:

char amessage[] = "now is the time";

Defines an array whose members live in the current scope's stack space, whereas:

char *pmessage = "now is the time";

Defines a pointer that lives in the current scope's stack space, but that references memory elsewhere (in this one, "now is the time" is stored elsewhere in memory, commonly a string table).

Also, note that because the data belonging to the second definition (the explicit pointer) is not stored in the current scope's stack space, it is unspecified exactly where it will be stored and should not be modified.

True, but it's a subtle difference. Essentially, the former:

char amessage[] = "now is the time";

Defines an array whose members live in the current scope's stack space, whereas:

char *pmessage = "now is the time";

Defines a pointer that lives in the current scope's stack space, but that references memory elsewhere (in this one, "now is the time" is stored elsewhere in memory, commonly a string table).

Also, note that because the data belonging to the second definition (the explicit pointer) is not stored in the current scope's stack space, it is unspecified exactly where it will be stored and should not be modified.

Edit: As pointed out by Mark, GMan, and Pavel, there is also a difference when the address-of operator is used on either of these variables. For instance, &pmessage returns a pointer of type char**, or a pointer to a pointer to chars, whereas &amessage returns a pointer of type char(*)[16], or a pointer to an array of 16 chars.