hello,
Basically what happens is a pointer holds the address of something.
So, lets say you create an object, then you delete it.
That pointer (unless set to NULL) will still point to the address of where that 
object used to be.
This can be a problem because when you think you are modifying a pointer later 
on, it could be pointing at object b instead of object a, etc.


Thanks,
Tyler Littlefield
Web: tysdomain.com
email: [email protected]
My programs don't have bugs, they're called randomly added features.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Robert Ryan 
  To: [email protected] 
  Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 4:56 PM
  Subject: Re: [c-prog] vector of pointer





  I am trying to understand pointers. Is a smart pointer the same an an 
auto_ptr minus the wrapper
  http://ootips.org/yonat/4dev/smart-pointers.html
  Dangling pointers. A common pitfall of regular pointers is the dangling 
pointer: a pointer that points to an object that is already deleted. 
  how can it point to something that has been deleted

  --- On Tue, 4/21/09, Tyler Littlefield <[email protected]> wrote:

  From: Tyler Littlefield <[email protected]>
  Subject: Re: [c-prog] vector of pointer
  To: [email protected]
  Date: Tuesday, April 21, 2009, 4:03 PM

  I forgot:
  Most APIs and libraries require that you use pointers to pass things around. 
The windows API is big, you have to know how to use them to use libc, etc etc. 
It's not something you can avoid, even with smart pointers, as most functions 
won't accept those.

  Thanks,
  Tyler Littlefield
  Web: tysdomain.com
  email: ty...@tysdomain. com
  My programs don't have bugs, they're called randomly added features.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Tyler Littlefield 
  To: c-p...@yahoogroups. com 
  Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 3:01 PM
  Subject: Re: [c-prog] vector of pointer

  >POINTERS RULE!!!!
  I haven't been using c/c++ for very long. It's mainly thanks to chris that I 
use pointers. I had a fobia, but after endless code editing sessions I finally 
get it. It's not an easy thing to learn, but it makes life so much easier, 
whether your using c++ or c. I use c more often than not, so I don't have all 
the OOP ideas, c tends to be more straight forward and easier for me to 
understand personally.

  Thanks,
  Tyler Littlefield
  Web: tysdomain.com
  email: ty...@tysdomain. com
  My programs don't have bugs, they're called randomly added features.

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: mcmprch 
  To: c-p...@yahoogroups. com 
  Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2009 2:54 PM
  Subject: Re: [c-prog] vector of pointer

  One of the good things about learning to code in x86 / z80 asm, then 'C' 
  in the 80's was that optomizing your code just became something you 
  did. It was a necessity because of the slow processor/memory of the 
  time. Think 'direct screen writing' on the old DOS pc's. It's one of the 
  reasons I preach kids to learn 'C' before they learn C++ or Java or C# 
  or VB.NET. These languages breed sloppy, lazy coding (sorry if I offend 
  anyone, but I've got enough years experience now to know that that is a 
  true statement). Part of that is the OOP paradigm we all try to strive 
  for today. It IS a good thing. I agree. The design of systems using OOP 
  techniques is better, easier. But coding should still be second nature 
  to young, up and coming geeks before we teach them design patterns...

  sorry, having a sloppy code day myself.... POINTERS RULE!!!!

  Michael

  Tyler Littlefield wrote:
  >
  >
  > well put, chris.
  > I think a few people on this list have a pointerfobia. And then again, 
  > there's always the "It's modern technology. What should it matter if 
  > it takes 5 cycles or 500, they are faster than they used to be.
  > I'd hate to see coding 10 years down the road.
  >
  > Thanks,
  > Tyler Littlefield
  > Web: tysdomain.com
  > email: ty...@tysdomain. com <mailto:tyler% 40tysdomain. com>
  > My programs don't have bugs, they're called randomly added features.
  >
  > -
  >

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



  

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply via email to