Every time I try to compile my code I get error:
cannot convert parameter 1 from 'int *' to 'int *&'
The test code looks like this:
void set (int *&val){
*val = 10;
}
int main(){
int myVal;
int *pMyVal = new int;
set(&myVal); // <- this causes trouble
set(pMyVal); // <- however, this doesn't
}
I'd like to call that function in a single shot without creating a pointer somewhere only to pass it. And as pointers don't have constructors, something like this can't be done: set(int*(&myVal));
Is there any other way to pass a pointer by reference without needing to create a temporary variable?
Edit: By the way I know why the code fails to compile (I'm just passing the address which is possibly int and not an actual pointer). The question is how else can it be done.
A reference to non-const cannot bind to an rvalue. The result of the & operator is an rvalue. Take a look at the difference between lvalues and rvalues or read a good C++ book.
Also, in your context, you don't need to pass by reference. The following is OK as well:
void set (int *val){
*val = 10;
}
The reference would be needed if you were to do something like this;
void set (int*& val){
val = new int; //notice, you change the value of val, not *val
*val = 10;
}
&myval is an rvalue (of type int*), because it's a temporary. It's a pointer, but you cannot modify it, because it's just created on the fly. Your function set however requires a non-const reference, so you cannot pass it a temporary.
By contrast, pMyVal is a named variable, thus an lvalue, so it can be passed as a non-constant reference.
A very simple example can be found in this place.
http://markgodwin.blogspot.de/2009/08/c-reference-to-pointer.html
You can see the following sample code:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
void change(int*& ptr) {
cout << endl;
cout << "==================change(int*& ptr)====================" << endl;
cout << " &ptr = " << &ptr << endl;
cout << " ptr = " << ptr << endl;
cout << "=======================================================" << endl;
cout << endl;
*ptr *= *ptr;
}
int main(void) {
int* ptrNumber = new int(10);
cout << endl;
cout << "&ptrNumber = " << &ptrNumber << endl;
cout << "ptrNumber = " << ptrNumber << endl;
cout << ">>> *ptrNumber = " << *ptrNumber << endl;
change(ptrNumber);
cout << "<<< *ptrNumber = " << *ptrNumber << endl;
}
I installed Cygwin and used g++ to compile the above source code, binary file is out_pointer.exe.
Executing out_pointer.exe, output is as follows:
$ ./out_pointer.exe
&ptrNumber = 0x28ac3c
ptrNumber = 0x800102c0
>>> *ptrNumber = 10
==================change(int*& ptr)====================
&ptr = 0x28ac3c
ptr = 0x800102c0
=======================================================
<<< *ptrNumber = 100
From the above output, we see
&ptrNumber = &ptr
So, ptr is alias of ptrNumber. You can modify ptrNumber inside function void change(int*& ptr) by modifying ptr. For example, you can point ptr to another memory location as below:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
void change(int*& ptr) {
cout << endl;
cout << "==================change(int*& ptr)====================" << endl;
cout << " &ptr = " << &ptr << endl;
cout << " >>> ptr = " << ptr << endl;
ptr = new int(20);
cout << " <<< ptr = " << ptr << endl;
cout << "=======================================================" << endl;
cout << endl;
}
int main(void) {
int* ptrNumber = new int(10);
cout << endl;
cout << ">>> &ptrNumber = " << &ptrNumber << endl;
cout << ">>> ptrNumber = " << ptrNumber << endl;
cout << ">>> *ptrNumber = " << *ptrNumber << endl;
change(ptrNumber);
cout << "<<< &ptrNumber = " << &ptrNumber << endl;
cout << "<<< ptrNumber = " << ptrNumber << endl;
cout << "<<< *ptrNumber = " << *ptrNumber << endl;
}
New output:
$ ./out_pointer.exe
>>> &ptrNumber = 0x28ac3c
>>> ptrNumber = 0x800102c0
>>> *ptrNumber = 10
==================change(int*& ptr)====================
&ptr = 0x28ac3c
>>> ptr = 0x800102c0
<<< ptr = 0x80048328
=======================================================
<<< &ptrNumber = 0x28ac3c
<<< ptrNumber = 0x80048328
<<< *ptrNumber = 20
The problem is, int*&val can only be passed an lvalue, which the result of &myVal is not. By changing the signature to void set(int* const& val), it's telling the compiler you're not going to change the value of the pointer.
However, you normally wouldn't do that, only because if you're not going to change the value of the pointer, then passing the pointer by value is the most straightforward way to pass the value. And if you are going to change the value of the pointer, then you need to create a temporary to receive the result.
Related
I find that the value of '*ptr' in the steps:3 does not equal 3
#include <bits/stdc++.h>
using namespace std;
int main(int arg, char* args[])
{
int* ptr;
int x = 4;
float y = 3.142;
cout << y << " " << &y << endl; //step:1
ptr = &x;
cout << ptr << " " << *ptr << endl; //step:2
ptr = (int*)(&y);
cout << ptr << " " << *ptr; //step:3 ->problem here
return 0;
}
ptr = (int*)(&y);
cout << ptr << " " << *ptr; //step:3 ->problem here
The second line invokes undefined behaviour. *ptr dereferences the memory pointed by ptr as if it pointed to an int. Since it doesn't (it points to a float), this is undefined behaviour.
Anything could happen from that point on.
Suppose 0xfe2200 is the memory address of a variable var2 and I want to display the value stored in it, E.g
cout<< "Value stored in the given address is : " << 0xfe2200 << " ";
I tried following but all in vain
cout << "Value is : " << *0xfee2200 << " ;
cout << "Value is : " << &0xfee200 << " ;
Assuming the address points to int, you may do:
cout << "Value is : " << *reinterpret_cast<int*>(0xfee2200);
as literal 0xfee2200 is an interger type whereas you expected a pointer.
You have to decide as what type of data you want to interpret the memory content and cast it accordingly:
const char* tmp = "foofoo"; // Valid ptr for this example
const void* address = tmp; // Set to your address
const int* i = reinterpret_cast<const int*>(address);
const unsigned short* us = reinterpret_cast<const unsigned short*>(address);
const char* c = reinterpret_cast<const char*>(address);
std::cout << "i: " << (*i)
<< "\nus: " << (*us)
<< "\nc: " << (*c);
Output:
i: 1718579046
us: 28518
c: f
I'm making some tests around c++ memory allocation.
In the following code sample I want to change the value of a const variable (= cannotBeChangedDirectly) using the memory location.
Why is it not working?
When I take a look at the memory I can see, that the value of the address (to which both variables, the const and the normal one are reffering to changes but when I print the result then the const variable still has the old result, why?)
Consider the following code sample:
#include "stdafx.h"
#include <iostream>
int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[])
{
const int cannotBeChangedDirectly = 10;
std::cout << "cannotBeChangedDirectly &" << &cannotBeChangedDirectly << " cannotBeChangedDirectly =" << cannotBeChangedDirectly << std::endl;
int* canBeChanged = const_cast<int*>(&cannotBeChangedDirectly);
std::cout << "cannotBeChangedDirectly &" << &cannotBeChangedDirectly << " canBeChanged & " << canBeChanged << std::endl;
std::cout << "cannotBeChangedDirectly =" << cannotBeChangedDirectly << " canBeChanged = " << *canBeChanged << std::endl;
*canBeChanged = 19;
std::cout << "cannotBeChangedDirectly &" << &cannotBeChangedDirectly << " canBeChanged & " << canBeChanged << std::endl;
std::cout << "cannotBeChangedDirectly =" << cannotBeChangedDirectly << " canBeChanged = " << *canBeChanged << std::endl;
}
Changing const´s is undefined behaviour, because:
const is not only that the compiler won´t let you change the variable directly,
but it allows further compiler optimization, like allocating no variable at all
and insert the value everyhere
cannotBeChangedDirectly is const doesn't only mean you can't modify it directly, it means modifying it in anyway is undefined behavior, including modifying it through a pointer.
const_cast works only for memory which is not const in the first place.
void example(const std::string* s)
{
std::string* edits = const_cast<std::string*>(s);
*edits="bar";
}
std::string a;
const std::string b;
int main(){
example(&a); //ok
example(&b); //undefined behavior.
}
This question already has answers here:
How to print function pointers with cout?
(7 answers)
Closed 9 years ago.
I'm not clear on what the values that are being returning from calling:
&next, fp, *fp, &return_func_ptr, fp_ptr, &fp_ptr, *fp_ptr
They all seem to give me the value 1. What does it mean?
Also, how would I declare
int (*return_f())(char)
to receive a parameter without using typedef?
#include <iostream>
int next(int n){
return n+99;
}
// returns pointer to a function
typedef int (*fptr)(int); // using typdef
fptr return_func_ptr(){
return next;
}
int f(char){
return 0;
}
int (*return_f())(char){ // how do you pass a parameter here?
// std::cout << "do something with " << param << std::endl;
return f;
}
int main()
{
int x = 5;
// p points to x
int *p = &x;
std::cout << "x=" << x << std::endl; // 5, value of x
std::cout << "&x=" << &x << std::endl; // 0x7fff6447a82c, address of x
std::cout << "p=" << p << std::endl; // 0x7fff6447a82c, value of p is address of x
std::cout << "*p=" << *p << std::endl; // 5, value of x (p dereferenced)
std::cout << "&p=" << &p << std::endl; // 0x7fff6447a820, address of p pointer
// change value of x thru p
// p = 6; // error, can't set int* to int
*p = 6;
std::cout << "x=" << x << std::endl; // 6
int y = 2;
// int *q = y; // error can't initiate with type int, needs int*
// pointer to a function
int (*fp)(int);
std::cout << "&fp=" << &fp << std::endl; // 0x7fff66da6810, address of pointer fp
std::cout << "fp=" << fp << std::endl; // 0, value of pointer fp
fp = &next; // fp points to function next(int)
fp = next;
std::cout << "&next=" << &next << std::endl; // 1, address of function?
std::cout << "fp=" << fp << std::endl; // 1, value is address of function?
std::cout << "&fp=" << &fp << std::endl; // 0x7fff66da6810, address of pointer fp?
std::cout << "*fp=" << *fp << std::endl; // 1, address of function?
// calling function thru pointer
int i = 0;
i = (*fp)(i);
std::cout << "i=" << i << std::endl; // 99
i = fp(i);
std::cout << "i=" << i << std::endl; // 198
// function returns pointer to function
fptr fp_ptr = return_func_ptr();
std::cout << "&return_func_ptr=" << &return_func_ptr << std::endl; // 1
std::cout << "fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl; // 1
std::cout << "&fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl; // 1
std::cout << "*fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl; // 1
int j = fp_ptr(1);
std::cout << "j=" << j << std::endl; // 100
}
There is some pointer here who seems not clear :
// pointer to a function
int (*fp)(int);
std::cout << "&fp=" << &fp << std::endl; // 0x7fff66da6810, address of pointer fp
std::cout << "fp=" << fp << std::endl; // 0, value of pointer fp
Here fp is undefined. Those lines have an undefined behaviour.
After that :
// function returns pointer to function
fptr fp_ptr = return_func_ptr();
std::cout << "&return_func_ptr=" << &return_func_ptr << std::endl; // 1
std::cout << "fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl; // 1
std::cout << "&fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl; // 1
// ^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^
std::cout << "*fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl; // 1
There are two things here :
On the line I pointed, I'm not sure it is what you wanted to test.
Also, cout doesn't have an overload to take a function pointer, it will take a bool instead. So it should be :
std::cout << "fn_ptr=" << reinterpret_cast<void*>( fn_ptr ) << std::endl;
I would suggest you to read this article about function pointer, it explains almost all you need to know : http://www.learncpp.com/cpp-tutorial/78-function-pointers/
std::cout << "fp_ptr=" << *fp_ptr << std::endl;
should be
std::cout << "fp_ptr=" << (void*)fp_ptr << std::endl;
The cout operator doesn't have an overload for a function pointer, so it uses bool instead. That's why you always get 1 as output. When I compile your code, I even get a warning for that, telling me that it will always evaluate to true. You should switch on all warnings and try to get rid of them.
I'm trying to store a lambda in an object system involving several layers of indirection. I'm using g++ 4.7.1.
Depending on how exactly I construct the (equivalent) objects, the lambda may or may not have the correct value.
Code:
#include <iostream>
#include <functional> // used for std::function
using namespace std; // TODO nope
typedef function<int()> intf;
struct SaveLambda {
const intf func;
SaveLambda(const intf& _func) : func(_func) {}
};
struct StoreSaved {
const SaveLambda* child;
StoreSaved(const SaveLambda& _child) : child(&_child) {
cout << "Before returning parent: " << child->func() << endl;
}
};
int main() {
const int ten = 10;
auto S = SaveLambda([ten](){return ten;});
cout << "No indirection: " << S.func() << endl << endl;
auto saved = StoreSaved(S);
cout << "Indirection, saved: " << saved.child->func() << endl << endl;
auto temps = StoreSaved ( SaveLambda([ten](){cout << "&ten: "<< &ten << endl; return ten;}) );
cout << "***** what. *****" << endl;
cout << "Indirection, unsaved: " << temps.child->func() << endl;
cout << "***** what. *****" << endl << endl;
cout << "ten still lives: " << ten << endl;
}
Compile as g++ -std=c++11 -Wall -o itest itest.cpp and run: notice the one line of output with a different value.
What am I doing wrong? I assumed that capture-by-value would, well, capture by value. (Observe most disconcertingly that the print in StoreSaved (line 15) produces the correct value, unlike line 34, despite these both referring to the same object. The only difference is adding another layer of indirection.)
This is wrong:
auto temps = StoreSaved(
/* This temporary value dies at the last semicolon! */
SaveLambda([ten](){cout << "&ten: "<< &ten << endl; return ten;})
);
StoreSaved then has a pointer to a nonexistent object. Using it is UB.
As already pointed out by others, the problem is that in temps you end with a pointer to a nonexistent SaveLambda struct, as it is a temporary.
You can keep a copy using a SaveLambda struct in StoreSaved, instead of a pointer:
struct StoreSaved {
const SaveLambda child;
StoreSaved(const SaveLambda& _child) : child(_child) {
cout << "Before returning parent: " << child.func() << endl;
}
};
You also have to change all the child->func() to child.func(), as you are not dealing with a pointer anymore.