What is the difference(if any??) on those 3:
int* p;
int * p;
int *p;
is there any difference?
I tried this
and they all output 5, so, I'm curious.Code:int* p1; int n1 = 5; p1 = &n1; cout << *p1 << endl; int *p2; int n2 = 5; p2 = &n2; cout << *p2 << endl; int * p3; int n3 = 5; p3 = &n3; cout << *p3 << endl;
Dag
> is there any difference?
No - they're all the same to the compiler.
> int* p;
Except this suggests a precedence which isn't true, which is more likely to affect the reader of the code.
Example
int *p,q;
p is a pointer to an int, q is just an int.
So saying
int* p,q;
makes it look more likely that p and q are both pointers (which would be wrong).
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.
thank you
>int* p;
It's amazing how many programmers use this one. Like Salem, I also prefer:
>int *p;
Or you could use the formatting scheme suggested by galmca. By completely omitting all whitespace, you reduce the size of a source code file, making it faster to transmit. Consider the truly elite form: int*p;
Of course, I merely suggest this in jest.Using the form Salem suggested has kept me from decieving myself several times. It's a good habit to acquire.
If I did your homework for you, then you might pass your class without learning how to write a program like this. Then you might graduate and get your degree without learning how to write a program like this. You might become a professional programmer without knowing how to write a program like this. Someday you might work on a project with me without knowing how to write a program like this. Then I would have to do you serious bodily harm. - Jack Klein
