At various times I've seen and used both of the following...
I've also seen it used both ways in tutorials I've studied. Both appear to get the same result (a pointer to an int, in the example).Code:int* test; int *test;
Is there any meaningful difference?
Read Stroustrup's take on the FAQ Is ``int* p;'' right or is ``int *p;'' right?
Look up a C++ Reference and learn How To Ask Questions The Smart WayOriginally Posted by Bjarne Stroustrup (2000-10-14)
Yep, read that...
Reason I'm asking is for some old code that has a bug I've never found.
If just moving the * causes the bug, then you have a buggy compiler.
Which of these helps you to figure out the type of q?Code:int * p, q; int *p, q;
Yes, this is very poor style, but it doesn't stop it from happening.
If you dance barefoot on the broken glass of undefined behaviour, you've got to expect the occasional cut.
If at first you don't succeed, try writing your phone number on the exam paper.
That's not what I said... I said I wanted clarification if it *might* be the problem. The answer was no, which is good enough for me.
Which of these helps you to figure out the type of q?Code:int * p, q; int *p, q;
Yes, this is very poor style, but it doesn't stop it from happening.[/QUOTE]
I don't stack declarations like that. As part of my commenting scheme I identify the function of each variable as I declare it.
If I did however... I would use the second form since it is visually more indicative of function.
