This question already has answers here:
Difference between operator new() and operator new[]()?
(5 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
int main()
{
int *y = new int(5);
cout << "y = " << y << " &y = " << &y << " *y = " << *y << endl;
int *p = new int[5];
cout << "p = " << p << " &p = " << &p << " *p =" << *p << endl;
}
one used [] and another one used (), what's the different and how it works? Can someone help to explain to me? Thanks!
int *y = new int(5)
This allocates a single int and sets its value to 5, then assigns y to point at the allocated int.
int *p = new int[5]
This allocates an array of 5 ints, whose values are initially undefined, then assigns p to point at the first int in the allocated array.
You output so many things in your std::cout but most of them don't matter.
try
std::cout << sizeof(int(5)) << " " << sizeof(int[5]) << "\n";
which will output
4 20
since int(5) means a single integer initialised with 5. So sizeof yields the size of an int.
On the other hand, int[5] is what you expect: an array of 5 integers, so sizeof yields 5*sizeof(int).
Two more remarks:
creating good old arrays with new definitely is something a beginner should refrain from. If you need dynamically sized indexable storage, use std::vector. There is no speed panalty.
refrain from using namespace std; simply type the std::, that makes the code more readable and clearly separates your stuff from library stuff.
Related
After a pointer is initialized, do you have to use the * dereference operator to call the pointer in a condition?
Example:
int main()
{
int var = 10;
int *ptr = &var;
if(ptr) // does this need to be if(*ptr) ???
{.......}
}
And can I have a short explanation as to why?
Thank you.
if (ptr)
check if the pointer is not Null but
if (*ptr)
check if the value it points to is not zero (in this example is 10)
So for checking the value you shoud add *.
It depends on what you want to do.
if(ptr) checks if the pointer value is nullptr or not. Note that this is shorthand for if(ptr != nullptr).
if(*ptr) checks if what the pointer points to is nullptr (or 0) - and in that case, since you dereference (follow) the pointer to answer the question, the pointer itself had better not be nullptr in that case.
First of all, a pointer is only a variable. However, there are different contexts in which you can use it.
As any other variable you can access the pointers content (which is the adress of the underlying memory) as follows:
int i = 1;
int * p = &i;
std::cout << p << std::endl
this would output the adress of i since this is what is stored in p
If you however want to access the content of the underlying memory (the value of i), you need to dereference the pointer first by using the * operator:
std::cout << *p << std::endl;
This would print the value of iso 1.
of course you can also access the pointer's adress (since the adress of i is a numeric value as well and needs to be stored somewhere too):
std::cout << &p << std::endl;
That would output the adress of p so the adress where the adress of i is stored :)
As a little example try to run this code:
#include <iostream>
int main() {
int i = 1;
int * p = &i;
std::cout << "Value of i(i): " << i << std::endl
<< "Adress of i(&i): " << &i << std::endl
<< "Value of p(p): " << p << std::endl
<< "Dereferenced p(*p): " << *p << std::endl
<< "Adress of p(&p): " << &p << std::endl
<< "Dereferenced adress of p(*(&p)): " << *(&p) << std::endl;
}
The following code:
#include<iostream>
int main (void) {
int lista[5] = {0,1,2,3,4};
std::cout << lista << std::endl;
std::cout << &lista << std::endl;
std::cout << lista+1 << std::endl;
std::cout << &lista+1 << std::endl;
std::cout << lista+2 << std::endl;
std::cout << &lista+2 << std::endl;
std::cout << lista+3 << std::endl;
std::cout << &lista+3 << std::endl;
return (0);
}
Outputs:
0x22ff20
0x22ff20
0x22ff24
0x22ff34
0x22ff28
0x22ff48
0x22ff2c
0x22ff5c
I understood that an array is another form to express a pointer, but we cannot change its address to point anywhere else after declaration. I also understood that an array has its value as the first position in memory. Therefore, 0x22ff20 in this example is the location of the array's starting position and the first variable is stored there.
What I did not understand is: why the other variables are not stored in sequence with the array address? I mean, why lista+1 is different from &lista+1. Should not they be the same?
In pointer arithmetic, types matter.
It's true that the value is the same for both lista and &lista, their types are different: lista (in the expression used in cout call) has type int* whereas &lista has type int (*)[5].
So when you add 1 to lista, it points to the "next" int. But &lista + 1 points to the location after 5 int's (which may not be a valid).
Answering the question as asked:
std::cout << &lista+1 << std::endl;
In this code you take the address of array lista and add 1 to obtained answer. Given the sizeof of the array is sizeof(int) * 5, which means when you increment a pointer to it by 1 you add sizeof(int) * 5 to the pointer address, you end up with a number you see.
I want to compare the memory address and pointer value of p, p + 1, q , and q + 1.
I want to understand, what the following values actually mean. I can't quite wrap my head around whats going on.
When I run the code:
I get an answer of 00EFF680 for everytime I compare the adresss p with another pointer.
I get an answer of 00EFF670 for everytime I compare the address of q with another pointer.
I get an answer of 15726208 when I look at the pointer value of p.
And I get an answer of 15726212 When I look at the pointer value of p + 1.
I get an answer of 15726192 when I look at the pointer value of q
And I get an answer of 15726200 Wehn I look at the pointer value of q + 1.
Code
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int val = 20;
double valD = 20;
int *p = &val;
double *q;
q = &valD;
cout << "Memory Address" << endl;
cout << p == p + 1;
cout << endl;
cout << q == q + 1;
cout << endl;
cout << p == q;
cout << endl;
cout << q == p;
cout << endl;
cout << p == q + 1;
cout << endl;
cout << q == p + 1;
cout << endl;
cout << "Now Compare Pointer Value" << endl;
cout << (unsigned long)(p) << endl;
cout << (unsigned long) (p + 1) << endl;
cout << (unsigned long)(q) << endl;
cout << (unsigned long) (q + 1) << endl;
cout <<"--------" << endl;
return 0;
}
There are a few warnings and/or errors.
The first is that overloaded operator << has higher precedence than the comparison operator (on clang++ -Woverloaded-shift-op-parentheses is the flag).
The second is that there is a comparison of distinct pointer types ('int *' and 'double *').
For the former, parentheses must be placed around the comparison to allow for the comparison to take precedence. For the latter, the pointers should be cast to a type that allows for safe comparison (e.g., size_t).
For instance on line 20, the following would work nicely.
cout << ((size_t) p == (size_t) (q + 1));
As for lines 25-28, this is standard pointer arithmetic. See the explanation here.
As to your question:
I want to compare p, p +1 , q , and q + 1. And Understand what the results mean.
If p is at address 0x80000000 then p+1 is at address 0x80000000 + sizeof(*p). If *p is int then this is 0x80000000 + 0x8 = 0x80000008. And the same reasoning applies for q.
So if you do p == p + 1 then compiler will first do the additon: p+1 then comparison, so you will have 0x80000000 == 0x80000008 which results in false.
Now to your code:
cout << p == p + 1;
is actually equivalent to:
(cout << p) == p + 1;
and that is because << has higher precedence than ==. Actually you should get a compilation error for this.
Another thing is comparision of pointers of non related types like double* with int*, without cast it should not compile.
In C and C++ pointer arithmetic is very closely tied with array manipulation. The goal is that
int array[3] = { 1, 10, 100 };
int *ptr = { 1, 10, 100 };
std::cout << array[2] << '\n';
std::cout << *(ptr + 2) << '\n';
outputs two 100s. This allows the language to treat arrays and pointers as equivalent - that's not the same thing as "the same" or "equal", see the C FAQ for clarification.
This means that the language allows:
int array[3] = { 1, 10, 100 };
int *ptr = { 1, 10, 100 };
And then
std::cout << (void*)array << ", " << (void*)&array[0] << '\n';
outputs the address of the first element twice, the first array behaves like a pointer.
std::cout << (void*)(array + 1) << ", " << (void*)&array[1] << '\n';
prints the address of the second element of array, again array behaving like a pointer in the first case.
std::cout << ptr[2] << ", " << *(ptr + 2) << '\n';
prints element #3 of ptr (100) twice, here ptr is behaving like an array in the first use,
std::cout << (void*)ptr << ", " << (void*)&ptr[0] << '\n';
prints the value of ptr twice, again ptr behaving like an array in the second use,
But this can catch people unaware.
const char* h = "hello"; // h points to the character 'h'.
std::cout << (void*)h << ", " << (void*)(h+1);
This prints the value of h and then a value one higher. But this is purely because the type of h is a pointer to a one-byte-sized data type.
h + 1;
is
h + (sizeof(*h)*1);
If we write:
const char* hp = "hello";
short int* sip = { 1 };
int* ip = { 1 };
std::cout << (void*)hp << ", " << (void*)(hp + 1) << "\n";
std::cout << (void*)sip << ", " << (void*)(sip + 1) << "\n";
std::cout << (void*)ip << ", " << (void*)(ip + 1) << "\n";
The first line of output will show two values 1 byte (sizeof char) apart, the second two values will be 2 bytes (sizeof short int) apart and the last will be four bytes (sizeof int) apart.
The << operator invokes
template<typename T>
std::ostream& operator << (std::ostream& stream, const T& instance);
The operator itself has very high precedence, higher than == so what you are actually writing is:
(std::cout << p) == p + 1
what you need to write is
std::cout << (p == p + 1)
this is going to print 0 (the result of int(false)) if the values are different and 1 (the result of int(true)) if the values are the same.
Perhaps a picture will help (For a 64bit machine)
p is a 64bit pointer to a 32bit (4byte) int. The green pointer p takes up 8 bytes. The data pointed to by p, the yellow int val takes up 4 bytes. Adding 1 to p goes to the address just after the 4th byte of val.
Similar for pointer q, which points to a 64bit (8byte) double. Adding 1 to q goes to the address just after the 8th byte of valD.
If you want to print the value of a pointer, you can cast it to void *, for example:
cout << static_cast<void*>(p) << endl;
A void* is a pointer of indefinite type. C code uses it often to point to arbitrary data whose type isn’t known at compile time; C++ normally uses a class hierarchy for that. Here, though, it means: treat this pointer as nothing but a memory location.
Adding an integer to a pointer gets you another pointer, so you want to use the same technique there:
cout << static_cast<void*>(p+1) << endl;
However, the difference between two pointers is a signed whole number (the precise type, if you ever need it, is defined as ptrdiff_t in <cstddef>, but fortunately you don’t need to worry about that with cout), so you just want to use that directly:
cout << (p+1) - p << endl;
cout << reinterpret_cast<char*>(p+1) - reinterpret_cast<char*>(p) << endl;
cout << (q - p) << endl;
That second line casts to char* because the size of a char is always 1. That’s a big hint what’s going on.
As for what’s going on under the hood: compare the numbers you get to sizeof(*p) and sizeof(*q), which are the sizes of the objects p and q point to.
The pointer values that are printed are likely to change on every execution (see why the addresses of local variables can be different every time and Address Space Layout Randomization)
I get an answer of 00EFF680 for everytime I compare the adresss p with another pointer.
int val = 20;
double valD = 20;
int *p = &val;
cout << p == p + 1;
It is translated into (cout << p) == p + 1; due to the higher precedence of operator << on operator ==.
It print the hexadecimal value of &val, first address on the stack frame of the main function.
Note that in the stack, address are decreasing (see why does the stack address grow towards decreasing memory addresses).
I get an answer of 00EFF670 for everytime I compare the address of q with another pointer.
double *q = &valD;
cout << q == q + 1;
It is translated into (cout << q) == q + 1; due to the precedence of operator << on operator ==.
It prints the hexadecimal value of &valD, second address on the stack frame of the main function.
Note that &valD <= &val - sizeof(decltype(valD) = double) == &val - 8 since val is just after valD on the stack. It is a compiler choice that respects some alignment constraints.
I get an answer of 15726208 when I look at the pointer value of p.
cout << (unsigned long)(p) << endl;
It just prints the decimal value of &val
And I get an answer of 15726212 When I look at the pointer value of p + 1.
int *p = &val;
cout << (unsigned long) (p + 1) << endl;
It prints the decimal value of &val + sizeof(*decltype(p)) = &val + sizeof(int) = &val + 4 since on your machine int = 32 bits
Note that if p is a pointer to type t, p+1 is p + sizeof(t) to avoid memory overlapping in array indexing.
Note that if p is a pointer to void, p+1 should be undefined (see void pointer arithmetic)
I get an answer of 15726192 when I look at the pointer value of q
cout << (unsigned long)(q) << endl;
It prints the decimal value of &valD
And I get an answer of 15726200 Wehn I look at the pointer value of q + 1.
cout << (unsigned long) (q + 1) << endl;
It prints the decimal value of &val + sizeof(*decltype(p)) = &valD + sizeof(double) = &valD + 8
So, I have been trying to learn C++ and in the tutorial book that I am reading, I have gotten stuck on a problem of pointers-to-pointers. What I am trying to do change the pointer a pointer-to-pointer is pointing to without changing the value of the original pointer. Here's some code...
#include <iostream>
void testFunc(int **func_p_to_p) {
int *createdPointer = new int(10);
*func_p_to_p = createdPointer;
cout << **func_p_to_p << endl; //prints 10 as I expect
}
int main() {
int **main_p_to_p = NULL;
int *mainPointer = new int(5);
main_p_to_p = &mainPointer;
testFunc(main_p_to_p);
cout << **test << endl;//prints 10, I expect this...
cout << *mainPointer << endl; //prints 10 as well, I don't want that.
}
I asked a similar question about this earlier, here and I understand sort of what is going on. However, I can't seem to figure out how I would change where a pointer-to-pointer is pointing to without changing the original value. Could anyone explain how I would do this? Thanks.
In the line
*func_p_to_p = createdPointer;
you first follow your pointer-pointer to what it is pointing to: The address of int *mainPointer.
Next you assign a new value to this pointer, the value of createdPointer which is the address of new int(10).
So your mainPointer is now changed to target the same memory as createdPointer. Does this make any sense to you?
You can't do that. main_p_to_p points to mainPointer, so modifying *main_p_to_p modifies mainPointer, full stop.
You might be looking for this, though:
int main() {
int **main_p_to_p = NULL;
int *mainPointer = new int(5);
int *secondPointer = mainPointer;
main_p_to_p = &secondPointer;
// prints 5 5 5
cout << *mainPointer << " " << *secondPointer << " " << **main_p_to_p << std::endl;
testFunc(main_p_to_p);
// prints 5 10 10
cout << *mainPointer << " " << *secondPointer << " " << **main_p_to_p << std::endl;
}
Note that you don't need the main_p_to_p variable, but I left it in for consistency with the question.
basic syntax of pointers: *ptr= &a
here &a will return the memory address of variable a and *ptr will store value of variable a
I want to ask, is it possible to make a pointer return a value from a given memory address? if yes what's the syntax
Yes, you can construct a pointer that refers to some arbitrary address in memory, by initialising the pointer with the address directly, instead of with an expression like &a:
int* ptr = (int*)0x1234ABCD; // hex for convenience
std::cout << *ptr;
Be careful, though, as it is rare that you know such a memory address exactly.
The cast (int*) is required as no implicit conversion exists between int and int*.
Yes. Use the dereference operator *.
For example;
int * a = new int;
int * b = new int;
*a = 5;
// Now a points to a memory location where the number 5 is stored.
b = a; //b now points to the same memory location.
cout << *b << endl; ///prints 5.
cout << a << " " << b << endl; //prints the same address.
int * c = new int;
c = *a;
// Now c points to another memory location than a, but the value is the same.
cout << *c << endl; ///prints 5.
cout << a << " " << c << endl; //prints different addresses.