sum of n numbers using structure of pointers

[rithish]

#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
struct data
{
    int n;
}**value;

int main()
{
    int m,c=0;
    printf("enter the number: ");
    scanf("%d",&m);
    value[1]->n=m;
    for(value[2]->n=0;value[2]->n<=value[1]->n;value[2]->n=value[2]->n+1)
    {
        c=c+value[2]->n;
    }
printf("%d",c);
}

it takes the value and compiler stops working

[rithish]

i dont know where stack overflow happens

[deceptikon]

There's no stack overflow, you're trying to dereference an uninitialized pointer. I'm not sure what to tell you at this point because you seem to completely ignore the advice of people who are trying to help you, and continually try to write code that you obviously lack the prerequisite knowledge and experience for.

You can't take shortcuts in this. Learn it step by step from the beginning, or you'll end up right where you are now: unable to write anything without asking for help on the basics that you neglected.

I think I'll just write you off as a lost cause and ignore any future questions, because it strikes me as a complete waste of my time to help someone who refuses to learn.

[rithish]

i dont know how to answer ur question bcoz as u say iam not a highly efficient programmer .iam still in learning the beasics. is structure of pointer a big thing its still a basic level.i know that iam in basic level in learning .please shoot out where i lack.or tell me in which topic i should be strong

[rithish]

is this topic advanced level????

[deceptikon]

please shoot out where i lack.or tell me in which topic i should be strong

I already told you: start over from hello world. Take your time with everything, including the little details. You've tried to progress too quickly and ended up in territory where your knowledge/experience is woefully inadequate.

The fact that you only recently learned how to consistently apply the address-of operator to non-pointer arguments for scanf() is evidence of your current level, yet you still try to do relatively complex things (eg. a pointer to a pointer to a structure).

Given how long it took you to finally stop using void main, despite being hounded by at least one person in every thread, I'm disinclined to humor you as you learn C in the least efficient way possible: dumb luck.

[rithish]

i stopped using void main() my dear friend

[deceptikon]

i stopped using void main() my dear friend

I know. I also know that you only stopped using it like yesterday. Further, I know that you've been told many, many, many times that void main is wrong and why, yet you stubbornly continuted to use it since you joined in April.

Kudos for no longer using void main, but such a trivial thing was a long and arduous battle. I'm inclined to believe that you'll be equally difficult to teach for everything else, and it tires me out just thinking of the long threads trying to convince you in vain to do things the right way or help you see the mistakes that you habitually make.

[rithish]

hey i joined in april 2011 at that time i was learning java since i didnt have much knowledge and i got stuck in fundamentals. so i decided to make myself to study c and c++ strongly.

[WaltP]

iam not a highly efficient programmer .iam still in learning the beasics.

So learn the basics!!!! Stop trying to understand how to build an airplane when you barely understand how to ride a bike. You clearly don't understand pointers well yet. Why the hell are you trying to deal with double and triple pointers???

And compilers don't stop working! Your CODE stops working!