Prev: initialising built in types with curly braces
Next: Mapping Templates function betweeen 2 class
From: barss on 24 Apr 2008 06:19
On Apr 23, 8:00 pm, "sk_usenet" <sometechyguy at gmail dot com> wrote:
> "Pat" <pkelecy@_REMOVETHIS_gmail.com> wrote in message
> >I have a question about the new operator. The syntax for it is:
>
> > int * pointer = new int;
>
> > which says that "pointer" points to a type int variable.
>
> > My question is why is "int" needed twice? I know it's needed from a
> > syntax standpoint, but I don't understand what additional information the
> > second int really provides. Doesn't the first int already tell you that
> > an int type value is going to be stored at the "pointer" address?
>
> What about arrays?
> int *p = new int[10];
>
> > Can you ever have,
>
> > int * pointer = new double
>
> No, realize that new operator is returning a double*, and heance trying to
> assign to an int* is not legal.
>
> > or something like that?
> > Thanks for any feedback on this.
>
> --http://techytalk.googlepages.com

never mind. You use "int" to store pointer. This trick will be work
for 32 bit platforms because size of any pointer will be 4 bytes. But
for 64 bit platforms you will have a problem, because size of any
pointer will be more than 4 bytes. You can see note also about pointer
to int conversion when compiling.
From: Francis Glassborow on 24 Apr 2008 06:38
barss wrote:
> On Apr 23, 8:00 pm, "sk_usenet" <sometechyguy at gmail dot com> wrote:
>> "Pat" <pkelecy@_REMOVETHIS_gmail.com> wrote in message
>>> I have a question about the new operator. The syntax for it is:
>>> int * pointer = new int;
>>> which says that "pointer" points to a type int variable.
>>> My question is why is "int" needed twice? I know it's needed from a
>>> syntax standpoint, but I don't understand what additional information the
>>> second int really provides. Doesn't the first int already tell you that
>>> an int type value is going to be stored at the "pointer" address?
>> What about arrays?
>> int *p = new int[10];
>>
>>> Can you ever have,
>>> int * pointer = new double
>> No, realize that new operator is returning a double*, and heance trying to
>> assign to an int* is not legal.
>>
>>> or something like that?
>>> Thanks for any feedback on this.
>> --http://techytalk.googlepages.com
>
> never mind. You use "int" to store pointer. This trick will be work
> for 32 bit platforms because size of any pointer will be 4 bytes. But
> for 64 bit platforms you will have a problem, because size of any
> pointer will be more than 4 bytes. You can see note also about pointer
> to int conversion when compiling.

Please explain what this has to do with the question. Nothing above said
anything about storing pointers in ints.
First  |  Prev  | 
Pages: 1 2
Prev: initialising built in types with curly braces
Next: Mapping Templates function betweeen 2 class