It just looks this way. Because you are using compiler where this two types have the same sizeTo me it looks like the address of string can be hold as a number
There are compilers where these two types will be of the different size
That's why standard complient compiler will always warn about such a cast
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
Addresses are treated as pointers in C, which is the whole reason it doesn't work without a cast.
Originally Posted by Adak
Thanks guys
It is clear to me now.
Regards,
Ben
Yeah but what if the code had been this:That is why I still don't understand why this would not work:
To me it looks like the address of string can be hold as a number by the integer variable.Code:int x = string;
Thanks
A char is only a single byte. And this will compile fine, because it uses a cast. But a byte is obviously not enough to hold a pointer value. Unless you are working on an 8-bit system that has 256 bytes of memory :PCode:char x = (char)string;
