For either short or int, -32767 to +32767 is guaranteed.Originally Posted by rogster001
For either short or int, -32767 to +32767 is guaranteed.
For signed, yes. For unsigned, that would be 0 - 65535.
to solve the 1st - just add () to function to indicate the call of the function
About the second - when you return something like
return "some const string";
you returning pointer to const string that will not be destructed, so its OK...
If you are creating the string inside your function - its another story
All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection,
except for the problem of too many layers of indirection.
– David J. Wheeler
I understand. So this would be fine
Thanks for you help!Code:const char *text[] = {"memory","information"}; int main() { while(i<100) { ... printf("Example %s\n",function()); ... i++; } return 0; } char* function () { char* data; ... data = text[0]; .... return data; }
Yes, it would work fine, but not the best solution. To return constant data, consider making it static to your function instead.
That way you avoid global variables.
You should declare function as
const char* function(void);
in this case
All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection,
except for the problem of too many layers of indirection.
– David J. Wheeler
Thanks.
What about
static const char* string[] = .... ?
its ok
Code:const char* sHelloWorld(void) { static const char* hello = "Hello, World!"; return hello; }
All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection,
except for the problem of too many layers of indirection.
– David J. Wheeler
> static const char* string[] = .... ?
Did you really want an array of read-only strings?
Probably, because that's what they would be even without const and static - string literals are non-writable in most modern OS's.
--
Mats
Compilers can produce warnings - make the compiler programmers happy: Use them!
Please don't PM me for help - and no, I don't do help over instant messengers.
but with const you will get warning from compiler when trying to assign pointer to this string to the regular char* pointer
All problems in computer science can be solved by another level of indirection,
except for the problem of too many layers of indirection.
– David J. Wheeler
Well aware of that, except that most of the examples up to now have been simple variables and not arrays. The OP might have been confused by vart's example. He demonstrated an entirely different type and its behavior.
