Printable View
PHP references are like C++ references. PHP5 objects are like Java objects, which behave like pointers without the pointer syntax, e.g., when you pass a PHP5 object as an argument, it is passed as if you are passing a pointer to the object. PHP4 objects are like C++ objects in that they are passed by value by default.Quote:
Sorry, I come from PHP where objects are just variables to classes.
makes sense. :DQuote:
Originally Posted by laserlight
Possibly, but you may also find that there are better ways, such as using a std::vector<bone> that contains the bones of that ragdoll. I presume, in this instance, a bone is defined as two end-points in x,y,z [,w] format, and the "meat/cloth" around the bone is built up by the code.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbelPoP
The biggest point (no pun intended) about pointers is that they can change what the refer to. Yes, you can use pointers to handle dynamic content [that is, hold a variable amount of data], but the generally accepted statement is that "if you can do it with a vector, you should" - and if you think you can't, you'd better have a solid motivation for that.
--
Mats
Yeah, but a vector is basically a pointer, so I guess so. :P either way.Quote:
Originally Posted by matsp
No it isn't. A vector is a storage class (container class) that allows you to add, remove, store and retrieve data. A pointer is a variable holding an address to something in memory. Whilst that can also allow you to add, remove, store and retrieve data, all of those mechanisms would have to be implemented by you.Quote:
Originally Posted by bobbelPoP
--
Mats
generalization of a pointer. :PQuote:
Originally Posted by matsp
A generalization of a pointer is an iterator.
A vector is not a pointer and I would keep them separate.
A vector is an array, if anything.
And an array, though similar to a pointer is not a pointer.
References "refer to objects", just like PHP references.
Pointers just store numeric memory addresses (which can even be 0, aka NULL), and you must use the dereference operator (*) and the address-of operator (&) with pointers, but not with references (it's done implicitly to make the syntax nicer).
In terms of usage, pointers are really only used in C++ for managing memory. When you want a memory address, consider passing a pointer, when you want an actual object (not just a copy, either), consider passing by reference.
> Pointers just store numeric memory addresses (which can even be 0, aka NULL)
Pointers are not numeric, but you can think of them that way, since they are usually mapped to a numeric addressing method.
Or in C++ terms: consider passing by reference if you can, and if not, pass by pointer.
BUMP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Could I just make all the variables/functions, pointers? :P
I suppose you could, but that would needlessly increase the complexity of your program with respect to programming and maintenance. Of course, functions are functions, except when they are converted to function pointers.Quote:
Could I just make all the variables/functions, pointers?
One of my biggest problems, which probably sounds kinda noobish, even though I understand the concept of WHY it's memory from other programs. :P But why memory?Quote:
Originally Posted by laserlight
Why do pointers use memory?
:S
By the way, are classes/structs pointers? cause I remember getting a compiler error that showed it was default by pointer.
What do you mean by "use"? Pointers "use" memory in the sense that variables use memory. Variables use memory because they store values. Values are stored in memory by design.Quote:
Why do pointers use memory?
No, though you can create pointers to class/struct types.Quote:
By the way, are classes/structs pointers?
So basically, non-pointer variables are limited by memory, and pointers are free to use as much memory? so to speak?Quote:
Originally Posted by laserlight