Pointer Basics

[Raja211991]

Hello! Could anyone figure out what's wrong with the following code?
:

#include <stdio.h>
int main()
{

    char s[]="raja";
    char *t;
    t=s;
    printf("t=%d\ns=%d\n\n",t,s);
        
        while(*s!='\0')
        {
            *t=*s;
            printf("%c",*t);
            s++;     //i get an error msg at this line "lvalue required as increment operand"// 
            t++;

        }
    
    return 0;
}
:

Thanks!

[grumpy]

s is an array of char. Arrays, unlike pointers, cannot be incremented.

[AndrewHunter]

And the other glaring problem is you are asking for help with C code in a C++ forum.

[Gooey]

AndrewHunter i am not so sure about the last bit as this is the C Programming section or has this has just been moved here?

[MK27]

AndrewHunter i am not so sure about the last bit as this is the C Programming section or has this has just been moved here?

It was moved.

[Raja211991]

Oops!!My bad....Sorry for the trouble guys.

[gardhr]

And the other glaring problem is you are asking for help with C code in a C++ forum.

Maybe I'm being too pedantic here, but that's still valid C++ (using deprecated header files, of course).

[AndrewHunter]

Maybe I'm being too pedantic here, but that's still valid C++ (using deprecated header files, of course).

That would depend on what your definition of valid is.

[gardhr]

That would depend on what your definition of valid is.

The C standard library isn't just IO. It's comprised of functions which form a good portion of the core C++ facilities as well (math functions, character-type mapping, etc). Moreover, C++ IO is typically implemented with C IO, internally, too, so...your validity argument just doesn't hold water, frankly.

[AndrewHunter]

1. I was joking, hence the winky guy.
2. It is not proper, nor suggested, C++ technique to use C style anything.
3. No implementation of C++ reverts to C IO anymore, the first C++ compiler did however that was a long long time ago. Thus your argument doesn't hold water
4. Before you start an argument when there isn't one, get your facts straight

[quzah]

Moreover, C++ IO is typically implemented with C IO, internally, too, so...your validity argument just doesn't hold water, frankly.

I really doubt that. The first C++ compiler was probably written in C, but once they got things going, I really doubt they just implemented all of their IO as C functions hidden by C++ calls. After all, once you can compile C++, you can rewrite the compiler as C++.


Quzah.

[gardhr]

I really doubt that. The first C++ compiler was probably written in C, but once they got things going, I really doubt they just implemented all of their IO as C functions hidden by C++ calls. After all, once you can compile C++, you can rewrite the compiler as C++.

Quzah.

Right, but the only alternative is to use OS-specific calls, which is certainly less portable. If it were up to me, I'd just keep it simple and use C IO.

It is not proper, nor suggested, C++ technique to use C style anything.

The beauty of C++ is that it is a "multi-paradigm" programming language. As long as safe coding practices are being used, there shouldn't be any shame in using C-style constructs.

[AndrewHunter]

Right, but the only alternative is to use OS-specific calls, which is certainly less portable. If it were up to me, I'd just keep it simple and use C IO.

Look, the compiler libraries are OS specific. How do you think they print things to the screen, access memory, the harddrive, ect.? They do that by making system calls. You seem to have a huge misunderstanding here on how a compiler/linker work; I suggest you do some reading.

The beauty of C++ is that it is a "multi-paradigm" programming language. As long as safe coding practices are being used, there shouldn't be any shame in using C-style constructs.

Wrong again, Bjarne Stroustrup himself has said so. You should read through his article on Learning C++ as a new programming language

[CommonTater]

Right, but the only alternative is to use OS-specific calls, which is certainly less portable. If it were up to me, I'd just keep it simple and use C IO.

And what, prey tell, do you think the underpinnings of C I/O is?
That's right... It's OS specific function calls.

For example: fopen() is almost certainly using the Windows CreateFile() function, since that is how you open files in Windows.

The beauty of C++ is that it is a "multi-paradigm" programming language. As long as safe coding practices are being used, there shouldn't be any shame in using C-style constructs.

The beauty of C++, far as I'm concerned, is that it's generally discussed in a different forum.

[AndrewHunter]

The beauty of C++, far as I'm concerned, is that it's generally discussed in a different forum.

Haha...brilliant! G'Day tater.