Related
I started learning C recently, and I'm having a problem understanding pointer syntax, for example when I write the following line:
int ** arr = NULL;
How can I know if:
arr is a pointer to a pointer of an integer
arr is a pointer to an array of pointers to integers
arr is a pointer to an array of pointers to arrays of integers
Isn't it all the same with int ** ?
Another question for the same problem:
If I have a function that receives char ** s as a parameter, I want to refer to it as a pointer to an array of strings, meaning a pointer to an array of pointers to an array of chars, but is it also a pointer to a pointer to a char?
Isn't it all the same with int **?
You've just discovered what may be considered a flaw in the type system. Every option you specified can be true. It's essentially derived from a flat view of a programs memory, where a single address can be used to reference various logical memory layouts.
The way C programmers have been dealing with this since C's inception, is by putting a convention in place. Such as demanding size parameter(s) for functions that accept such pointers, and documenting their assumptions about the memory layout. Or demanding that arrays be terminated with a special value, thus allowing "jagged" buffers of pointers to buffers.
I feel a certain amount of clarification is in order. As you'd see when consulting the other very good answers here, arrays are most definitely not pointers. They do however decay into ones in enough contexts to warrant a decades long error in teaching about them (but I digress).
What I originally wrote refers to code as follows:
void func(int **p_buff)
{
}
//...
int a = 0, *pa = &a;
func(&pa);
//...
int a[3][10];
int *a_pts[3] = { a[0], a[1], a[2] };
func(a_pts);
//...
int **a = malloc(10 * sizeof *a);
for(int i = 0; i < 10; ++i)
a[i] = malloc(i * sizeof *a[i]);
func(a);
Assume func and each code snippet is compiled in a separate translation unit. Each example (barring any typos by me) is valid C. The arrays will decay into a "pointer-to-a-pointer" when passed as arguments. How is the definition of func to know what exactly it was passed from the type of its parameter alone!? The answer is that it cannot. The static type of p_buff is int**, but it still allows func to indirectly access (parts of) objects with vastly different effective types.
The declaration int **arr says: "declare arr as a pointer to a pointer to an integer". It (if valid) points to a single pointer that points (if valid) to a single integer object. As it is possible to use pointer arithmetic with either level of indirection (i.e. *arr is the same as arr[0] and **arr is the same as arr[0][0]) , the object can be used for accessing any of the 3 from your question (that is, for second, access an array of pointers to integers, and for third, access an array of pointers to first elements of integer arrays), provided that the pointers point to the first elements of the arrays...
Yet, arr is still declared as a pointer to a single pointer to a single integer object. It is also possible to declare a pointer to an array of defined dimensions. Here a is declared as a pointer to 10-element array of pointers to arrays of 10 integers:
cdecl> declare a as pointer to array 10 of pointer to array 10 of int;
int (*(*a)[10])[10]
In practice array pointers are most used for passing in multidimensional arrays of constant dimensions into functions, and for passing in variable-length arrays. The syntax to declare a variable as a pointer to an array is seldom seen, as whenever they're passed into a function, it is somewhat easier to use parameters of type "array of undefined size" instead, so instead of declaring
void func(int (*a)[10]);
one could use
void func(int a[][10])
to pass in a a multidimensional array of arrays of 10 integers. Alternatively, a typedef can be used to lessen the headache.
How can I know if :
arr is a pointer to a pointer of an integer
It is always a pointer to pointer to integer.
arr is a pointer to an array of pointers to integers
arr is a pointer to an array of pointers to arrays of integers
It can never be that. A pointer to an array of pointers to integers would be declared like this:
int* (*arr)[n]
It sounds as if you have been tricked to use int** by poor teachers/books/tutorials. It is almost always incorrect practice, as explained here and here and (
with detailed explanation about array pointers) here.
EDIT
Finally got around to writing a detailed post explaining what arrays are, what look-up tables are, why the latter are bad and what you should use instead: Correctly allocating multi-dimensional arrays.
Having solely the declaration of the variable, you cannot distinguish the three cases. One can still discuss if one should not use something like int *x[10] to express an array of 10 pointers to ints or something else; but int **x can - due to pointer arithmetics, be used in the three different ways, each way assuming a different memory layout with the (good) chance to make the wrong assumption.
Consider the following example, where an int ** is used in three different ways, i.e. p2p2i_v1 as a pointer to a pointer to a (single) int, p2p2i_v2 as a pointer to an array of pointers to int, and p2p2i_v3 as a pointer to a pointer to an array of ints. Note that you cannot distinguish these three meanings solely by the type, which is int** for all three. But with different initialisations, accessing each of them in the wrong way yields something unpredictable, except accessing the very first elements:
int i1=1,i2=2,i3=3,i4=4;
int *p2i = &i1;
int **p2p2i_v1 = &p2i; // pointer to a pointer to a single int
int *arrayOfp2i[4] = { &i1, &i2, &i3, &i4 };
int **p2p2i_v2 = arrayOfp2i; // pointer to an array of pointers to int
int arrayOfI[4] = { 5,6,7,8 };
int *p2arrayOfi = arrayOfI;
int **p2p2i_v3 = &p2arrayOfi; // pointer to a pointer to an array of ints
// assuming a pointer to a pointer to a single int:
int derefi1_v1 = *p2p2i_v1[0]; // correct; yields 1
int derefi1_v2 = *p2p2i_v2[0]; // correct; yields 1
int derefi1_v3 = *p2p2i_v3[0]; // correct; yields 5
// assuming a pointer to an array of pointers to int's
int derefi1_v1_at1 = *p2p2i_v1[1]; // incorrect, yields ? or seg fault
int derefi1_v2_at1 = *p2p2i_v2[1]; // correct; yields 2
int derefi1_v3_at1 = *p2p2i_v3[1]; // incorrect, yields ? or seg fault
// assuming a pointer to an array of pointers to an array of int's
int derefarray_at1_v1 = (*p2p2i_v1)[1]; // incorrect; yields ? or seg fault;
int derefarray_at1_v2 = (*p2p2i_v2)[1]; // incorrect; yields ? or seg fault;
int derefarray_at1_v3 = (*p2p2i_v3)[1]; // correct; yields 6;
How can I know if :
arr is a pointer to a pointer of an integer
arr is a pointer to an array of pointers to integers
arr is a pointer to an array of pointers to arrays of integers
You cannot. It can be any of those. What it ends up being depends on how you allocate / use it.
So if you write code using these, document what you're doing with them, pass size parameters to the functions using them, and generally be sure about what you allocated before using it.
Pointers do not keep the information whether they point to a single object or an object that is an element of an array. Moreover for the pointer arithmetic single objects are considered like arrays consisting from one element.
Consider these declarations
int a;
int a1[1];
int a2[10];
int *p;
p = &a;
//...
p = a1;
//...
p = a2;
In this example the pointer p deals with addresses. It does not know whether the address it stores points to a single object like a or to the first element of the array a1 that has only one element or to the first element of the array a2 that has ten elements.
The type of
int ** arr;
only have one valid interpretation. It is:
arr is a pointer to a pointer to an integer
If you have no more information than the declaration above, that is all you can know about it, i.e. if arr is probably initialized, it points to another pointer, which - if probably initialized - points to an integer.
Assuming proper initialization, the only guaranteed valid way to use it is:
**arr = 42;
int a = **arr;
However, C allows you to use it in multiple ways.
• arr can be used as a pointer to a pointer to an integer (i.e. the basic case)
int a = **arr;
• arr can be used as a pointer to a pointer to an an array of integer
int a = (*arr)[4];
• arr can be used as a pointer to an array of pointers to integers
int a = *(arr[4]);
• arr can be used as a pointer to an array of pointers to arrays of integers
int a = arr[4][4];
In the last three cases it may look as if you have an array. However, the type is not an array. The type is always just a pointer to a pointer to an integer - the dereferencing is pointer arithmetic. It is nothing like a 2D array.
To know which is valid for the program at hand, you need to look at the code initializing arr.
Update
For the updated part of the question:
If you have:
void foo(char** x) { .... };
the only thing that you know for sure is that **x will give a char and *x will give you a char pointer (in both cases proper initialization of x is assumed).
If you want to use x in another way, e.g. x[2] to get the third char pointer, it requires that the caller has initialized x so that it points to a memory area that has at least 3 consecutive char pointers. This can be described as a contract for calling foo.
C syntax is logical. As an asterisk before the identifier in the declaration means pointer to the type of the variable, two asterisks mean pointer to a pointer to the type of the variable.
In this case arr is a pointer to a pointer to integer.
There are several usages of double pointers. For instance you could represent a matrix with a pointer to a vector of pointers. Each pointer in this vector points to the row of the matrix itself.
One can also create a two dimensional array using it,like this
int **arr=(int**)malloc(row*(sizeof(int*)));
for(i=0;i<row;i++) {
*(arr+i)=(int*)malloc(sizeof(int)*col); //You can use this also. Meaning of both is same. //
arr[i]=(int*)malloc(sizeof(int)*col); }
There is one trick when using pointers, read it from right hand side to the left hand side:
int** arr = NULL;
What do you get: arr, *, *, int, so array is a pointer to a pointer to an integer.
And int **arr; is the same as int** arr;.
int ** arr = NULL;
It's tell the compiler, arr is a double pointer of an integer and assigned NULL value.
There are already good answers here, but I want to mention my "goto" site for complicated declarations: http://cdecl.org/
Visit the site, paste your declaration and it will translate it to English.
For int ** arr;, it says declare arr as pointer to pointer to int.
The site also shows examples. Test yourself on them, then hover your cursor to see the answer.
(double (^)(int , long long ))foo
cast foo into block(int, long long) returning double
int (*(*foo)(void ))[3]
declare foo as pointer to function (void) returning pointer to array 3 of int
It will also translate English into C declarations, which is prety neat - if you get the description correct.
What is the difference between the following declarations:
int* arr1[8];
int (*arr2)[8];
int *(arr3[8]);
What is the general rule for understanding more complex declarations?
int* arr[8]; // An array of int pointers.
int (*arr)[8]; // A pointer to an array of integers
The third one is same as the first.
The general rule is operator precedence. It can get even much more complex as function pointers come into the picture.
Use the cdecl program, as suggested by K&R.
$ cdecl
Type `help' or `?' for help
cdecl> explain int* arr1[8];
declare arr1 as array 8 of pointer to int
cdecl> explain int (*arr2)[8]
declare arr2 as pointer to array 8 of int
cdecl> explain int *(arr3[8])
declare arr3 as array 8 of pointer to int
cdecl>
It works the other way too.
cdecl> declare x as pointer to function(void) returning pointer to float
float *(*x)(void )
I don't know if it has an official name, but I call it the Right-Left Thingy(TM).
Start at the variable, then go right, and left, and right...and so on.
int* arr1[8];
arr1 is an array of 8 pointers to integers.
int (*arr2)[8];
arr2 is a pointer (the parenthesis block the right-left) to an array of 8 integers.
int *(arr3[8]);
arr3 is an array of 8 pointers to integers.
This should help you out with complex declarations.
int *a[4]; // Array of 4 pointers to int
int (*a)[4]; //a is a pointer to an integer array of size 4
int (*a[8])[5]; //a is an array of pointers to integer array of size 5
The answer for the last two can also be deducted from the golden rule in C:
Declaration follows use.
int (*arr2)[8];
What happens if you dereference arr2? You get an array of 8 integers.
int *(arr3[8]);
What happens if you take an element from arr3? You get a pointer to an integer.
This also helps when dealing with pointers to functions. To take sigjuice's example:
float *(*x)(void )
What happens when you dereference x? You get a function that you can call with no arguments. What happens when you call it? It will return a pointer to a float.
Operator precedence is always tricky, though. However, using parentheses can actually also be confusing because declaration follows use. At least, to me, intuitively arr2 looks like an array of 8 pointers to ints, but it is actually the other way around. Just takes some getting used to. Reason enough to always add a comment to these declarations, if you ask me :)
edit: example
By the way, I just stumbled across the following situation: a function that has a static matrix and that uses pointer arithmetic to see if the row pointer is out of bounds. Example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define NUM_ELEM(ar) (sizeof(ar) / sizeof((ar)[0]))
int *
put_off(const int newrow[2])
{
static int mymatrix[3][2];
static int (*rowp)[2] = mymatrix;
int (* const border)[] = mymatrix + NUM_ELEM(mymatrix);
memcpy(rowp, newrow, sizeof(*rowp));
rowp += 1;
if (rowp == border) {
rowp = mymatrix;
}
return *rowp;
}
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
int i = 0;
int row[2] = {0, 1};
int *rout;
for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
row[0] = i;
row[1] += i;
rout = put_off(row);
printf("%d (%p): [%d, %d]\n", i, (void *) rout, rout[0], rout[1]);
}
return 0;
}
Output:
0 (0x804a02c): [0, 0]
1 (0x804a034): [0, 0]
2 (0x804a024): [0, 1]
3 (0x804a02c): [1, 2]
4 (0x804a034): [2, 4]
5 (0x804a024): [3, 7]
Note that the value of border never changes, so the compiler can optimize that away. This is different from what you might initially want to use: const int (*border)[3]: that declares border as a pointer to an array of 3 integers that will not change value as long as the variable exists. However, that pointer may be pointed to any other such array at any time. We want that kind of behaviour for the argument, instead (because this function does not change any of those integers). Declaration follows use.
(p.s.: feel free to improve this sample!)
typedef int (*PointerToIntArray)[];
typedef int *ArrayOfIntPointers[];
As a rule of thumb, right unary operators (like [], (), etc) take preference over left ones. So, int *(*ptr)()[]; would be a pointer that points to a function that returns an array of pointers to int (get the right operators as soon as you can as you get out of the parenthesis)
I think we can use the simple rule ..
example int * (*ptr)()[];
start from ptr
" ptr is a pointer to "
go towards right ..its ")" now go left its a "("
come out go right "()" so
" to a function which takes no arguments " go left "and returns a pointer " go right "to
an array" go left " of integers "
Here's an interesting website that explains how to read complex types in C:
http://www.unixwiz.net/techtips/reading-cdecl.html
Here's how I interpret it:
int *something[n];
Note on precedence: array subscript operator ([]) has higher priority than
dereference operator (*).
So, here we will apply the [] before *, making the statement equivalent to:
int *(something[i]);
Note on how a declaration makes sense: int num means num is an int, int *ptr or int (*ptr) means, (value at ptr) is
an int, which makes ptr a pointer to int.
This can be read as, (value of the (value at ith index of the something)) is an integer. So, (value at the ith index of something) is an (integer pointer), which makes the something an array of integer pointers.
In the second one,
int (*something)[n];
To make sense out of this statement, you must be familiar with this fact:
Note on pointer representation of array: somethingElse[i] is equivalent to *(somethingElse + i)
So, replacing somethingElse with (*something), we get *(*something + i), which is an integer as per declaration. So, (*something) given us an array, which makes something equivalent to (pointer to an array).
I guess the second declaration is confusing to many. Here's an easy way to understand it.
Lets have an array of integers, i.e. int B[8].
Let's also have a variable A which points to B. Now, value at A is B, i.e. (*A) == B. Hence A points to an array of integers. In your question, arr is similar to A.
Similarly, in int* (*C) [8], C is a pointer to an array of pointers to integer.
int *arr1[5]
In this declaration, arr1 is an array of 5 pointers to integers.
Reason: Square brackets have higher precedence over * (dereferncing operator).
And in this type, number of rows are fixed (5 here), but number of columns is variable.
int (*arr2)[5]
In this declaration, arr2 is a pointer to an integer array of 5 elements.
Reason: Here, () brackets have higher precedence than [].
And in this type, number of rows is variable, but the number of columns is fixed (5 here).
In pointer to an integer if pointer is incremented then it goes next integer.
in array of pointer if pointer is incremented it jumps to next array
I know that, for the following:
int a[10];
a is a pointer of the type int * to a[0], while &a is a pointer of type int (*)[10].
Now my question is for the following 2D array:
int b[20][30];
Is b a pointer of the type int **? Or is it a pointer of the type int (*)[30]?
Is &b a pointer of the type int (*)[20][30]?
Arrays are not pointers (this point cannot be stressed enough).
That being said, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. For example:
int a[10];
int b[20][30];
void print_a(int *);
void print_b(int (*)[30]);
print_a(a);
print_b(b);
The first element of a is a[0], and similarly the first element of b is b[0]. You basically take that first dimension away, and change it to a (*); I'll explain more in a moment since it is a bit more complex than that.
The relationship between pointers and arrays is riddled with contextual subtleties that aren't terribly difficult to grasp, but the size information in various scopes makes it interesting and also helps to give you an idea of how the decay works:
#include <stdio.h>
int h(int *pa)
{
printf("h(int *): sizeof pa=%zu\n", sizeof pa);
printf("h(int *): sizeof *pa=%zu\n", sizeof *pa);
return *pa;
}
int g(int (*pa)[5])
{
printf("g(int (*)[5]): sizeof pa=%zu\n", sizeof pa);
printf("g(int (*)[5]): sizeof *pa=%zu\n", sizeof *pa);
return h(*pa);
}
int f(int (*pa)[3][5])
{
printf("f(int (*)[3][5]): sizeof pa=%zu\n", sizeof pa);
printf("f(int (*)[3][5]): sizeof *pa=%zu\n", sizeof *pa);
return g(*pa);
}
int main(void)
{
int arr[2][3][5] = {{{11235}}};
printf("main: sizeof arr=%zu\n", sizeof arr);
printf("main: sizeof *arr=%zu\n", sizeof *arr);
printf("%d\n", f(arr));
}
Every pointer is the same size (this may not always be true on all platforms!), but by dereferencing the pointer, you see the size of a given element of the array, whether you dereference using the unary * operator or the [N] array notation, which is equivalent to *((array)+(N)) by definition.
Anyway, going back to the difference between pointers and arrays, you should understand that int[20][30] is not the same as int **. Why is that? Because of the fact that int[20][30] decays to a pointer of type int(*)[30], no more decay can occur until the pointer is dereferenced. Moreover, int ** is actually int *(*), which means it can point to the first element of an array of pointers. That is, int ** might have once been int *[N].
int foo[x][y][z] <=> int (*foo)[y][z]
int *foo[m][n] <=> int *(*foo)[n]
int (*foo[a])[b] <=> int (**foo)[b]
In the first case, we have a 3-D array, which decays to a pointer to a 2-D array; in other words, an array of arrays and a pointer to an array are closely related and interchangeable in many contexts aside from the size issue. The first dimension x is the one that decays, leaving the y and z dimensions.
In the second case, we have a 2-D array of pointers. This decays to a pointer to an array of pointers. Again, an array of arrays is closely related to a pointer to an array, and dimension m decays, leaving dimension n.
In the third case, we have an array of pointers to arrays. It decays to a pointer to a pointer to an array. Since dimension a is closest to the variable name, that is the one that decays, leaving dimension b. Note that since it is an array of pointers to arrays, the pointers could point to the first element of arrays themselves:
int arr[2][3][5];
int (*foo[2])[5] = { arr[0], arr[1] };
int (**foo_ptr)[5] = foo;
Recap:
Array (size A) of arrays (size B) <=> Pointer to array (size B)
Array (size A) of pointers <=> Pointer to pointer
The array that decays/grows is always the innermost array/pointer, the innermost being the one closest to the variable name in the variable declaration, with arrays having higher associativity than pointers, though of course parentheses make all the difference.
This rabbit hole obviously can be confusing, but I hope I helped a bit at least!
First of all make it clear that arrays are not pointers. Relationship between pointers and arrays is subtle. I would suggest you to read second chapter of tutorial on pointers by Ted Jensen first.
I would like to tell you something in a nutshell what has been describe in this chap. Consider following example.
int a[10];
int *p;
Now you can write
p=a;
that is equivalent to
p=&a[0];
This thing make many texts to say array is name of pointer. But it is better if you say "the name of the array is the address of first element in the array" .
Because though you can write
p=a;
but you can not write
a=p;
Now come to your question:
From above discussion it should be clear that b is not pointer of type int** .For example:
int b[10][10];
int **x;
int *p;
b=&p; // this is error
x=&p; // this fine
For your other questions you may use online CDECL.
if you write
int b[10][10]; --> declare b as array 10 of array 10 of int
int (*p)[10]; --> declare p as pointer to array 10 of int
int (*p)[10][20]; --> declare p as pointer to array 10 of array 20 of int
No, a is not of type int*, it is of type int [10] (i. e. of an array type). This is why sizeof(a) will give you the size of the array (40 bytes, assuming 32 bit integers).
Likewise, b is of type int [20][30], which is nothing other than an array of arrays. I. e. sizeof(b[0]) is the size of one line array, which is 120 in this case, the size of the entire array (sizeof(b)) is 20 times the size of the line arrays, which is 2400 bytes in this case.
The trick is, that an array decays into a pointer to its first element in almost all contexts. So when you do pointer arithmetic (as in b[3]) on the 2D array, b decays into a pointer of type int (*)[30], so the pointer arithmetic skips rows, adding three times the size of a row (360 bytes in this case) - the rows are the elements of the 2D array. The resulting type of b[3] is int [30], i. e. the dereferenced pointer.
Once you have dereferenced to a row array with b[3], you can again invoke pointer arithmetic to select the correct element in this row (b[3][5]). Again, the array-pointer-decay is invoked, the mechanic is the same.
Note that there is no pointer array involved as is the case when you emulate a 2D array with an int**. The double dereference b[3][5] translates into something like ((int*)b)[3*30 + 5] by virtue of array-pointer-decay, only the element itself is accessed from memory.
int* temp;
int arraySize = 20;
temp = (int *)malloc(arraySize * sizeof(int));
This will create a section in memory 20 "ints" long, similarly as you mentioned.
int** temp;
int arraySize = 20;
int rowSize = 10;
temp = (int **)malloc(arraySize * sizeof(int *));
for(i=0; i<arraySize; i++){
temp[i] = (int *)malloc(rowSize * sizeof(int));
}
That is what the 2D array would actually look like.
temp[0] would give you the address of the first "array". In which you could do something like above int *array = temp[0] then access it like a normal array but using *array[0] to get the value.
2D arrays really don't mesh well with pointers and saying *temp[0] to get the values of the first array. You can try to mess with it, you'll figure it out, but don't have a machine that can compile C with me right now.
Reference that may help: http://www.cs.swarthmore.edu/~newhall/unixhelp/C_arrays.html
I have an array of int pointers int* arr[MAX]; and I want to store its address in another variable. How do I define a pointer to an array of pointers? i.e.:
int* arr[MAX];
int (what here?) val = &arr;
The correct answer is:
int* arr[MAX];
int* (*pArr)[MAX] = &arr;
Or just:
int* arr [MAX];
typedef int* arr_t[MAX];
arr_t* pArr = &arr;
The last part reads as "pArr is a pointer to array of MAX elements of type pointer to int".
In C the size of array is stored in the type, not in the value. If you want this pointer to correctly handle pointer arithmetic on the arrays (in case you'd want to make a 2-D array out of those and use this pointer to iterate over it), you - often unfortunately - need to have the array size embedded in the pointer type.
Luckily, since C99 and VLAs (maybe even earlier than C99?) MAX can be specified in run-time, not compile time.
Should just be:
int* array[SIZE];
int** val = array;
There's no need to use an address-of operator on array since arrays decay into implicit pointers on the right-hand side of the assignment operator.
IIRC, arrays are implicitly convertible to pointers, so it would be:
int ** val = arr;
According to this source http://unixwiz.net/techtips/reading-cdecl.html, by using the "go right when you can, go left when you must" rule, we get the following 2 meanings of the declarations given in the previous answers -
int **val ==> val is a pointer to pointer to int
int* (*pArr)[MAX] ==> pArr is a pointer to an array of MAX length pointers to int.
I hope the above meanings make sense and if they don't, it would probably be a good idea to peruse the above mentioned source.
Now it should be clear that the second declaration is the one which moteutsch is looking for as it declares a pointer to an array of pointers.
So why does the first one also work? Remember that
int* arr[MAX]
is an array of integer pointers. So, val is a pointer to, the pointer to the first int declared inside the int pointer array.
#define SIZE 10
int *(*yy)[SIZE];//yy is a pointer to an array of SIZE number of int pointers
and so initialize yy to array as below -
int *y[SIZE]; //y is array of SIZE number of int pointers
yy = y; // Initialize
//or yy = &y; //Initialize
I believe the answer is simply:
int **val;
val = arr;
As far as I know there is no specific type "array of integers" in c, thus it's impossible to have a specific pointer to it. The only thing you can do is to use a pointer to the int: int*, but you should take into account a size of int and your array length.
What is the difference between the following declarations:
int* arr1[8];
int (*arr2)[8];
int *(arr3[8]);
What is the general rule for understanding more complex declarations?
int* arr[8]; // An array of int pointers.
int (*arr)[8]; // A pointer to an array of integers
The third one is same as the first.
The general rule is operator precedence. It can get even much more complex as function pointers come into the picture.
Use the cdecl program, as suggested by K&R.
$ cdecl
Type `help' or `?' for help
cdecl> explain int* arr1[8];
declare arr1 as array 8 of pointer to int
cdecl> explain int (*arr2)[8]
declare arr2 as pointer to array 8 of int
cdecl> explain int *(arr3[8])
declare arr3 as array 8 of pointer to int
cdecl>
It works the other way too.
cdecl> declare x as pointer to function(void) returning pointer to float
float *(*x)(void )
I don't know if it has an official name, but I call it the Right-Left Thingy(TM).
Start at the variable, then go right, and left, and right...and so on.
int* arr1[8];
arr1 is an array of 8 pointers to integers.
int (*arr2)[8];
arr2 is a pointer (the parenthesis block the right-left) to an array of 8 integers.
int *(arr3[8]);
arr3 is an array of 8 pointers to integers.
This should help you out with complex declarations.
int *a[4]; // Array of 4 pointers to int
int (*a)[4]; //a is a pointer to an integer array of size 4
int (*a[8])[5]; //a is an array of pointers to integer array of size 5
The answer for the last two can also be deducted from the golden rule in C:
Declaration follows use.
int (*arr2)[8];
What happens if you dereference arr2? You get an array of 8 integers.
int *(arr3[8]);
What happens if you take an element from arr3? You get a pointer to an integer.
This also helps when dealing with pointers to functions. To take sigjuice's example:
float *(*x)(void )
What happens when you dereference x? You get a function that you can call with no arguments. What happens when you call it? It will return a pointer to a float.
Operator precedence is always tricky, though. However, using parentheses can actually also be confusing because declaration follows use. At least, to me, intuitively arr2 looks like an array of 8 pointers to ints, but it is actually the other way around. Just takes some getting used to. Reason enough to always add a comment to these declarations, if you ask me :)
edit: example
By the way, I just stumbled across the following situation: a function that has a static matrix and that uses pointer arithmetic to see if the row pointer is out of bounds. Example:
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
#include <string.h>
#define NUM_ELEM(ar) (sizeof(ar) / sizeof((ar)[0]))
int *
put_off(const int newrow[2])
{
static int mymatrix[3][2];
static int (*rowp)[2] = mymatrix;
int (* const border)[] = mymatrix + NUM_ELEM(mymatrix);
memcpy(rowp, newrow, sizeof(*rowp));
rowp += 1;
if (rowp == border) {
rowp = mymatrix;
}
return *rowp;
}
int
main(int argc, char *argv[])
{
int i = 0;
int row[2] = {0, 1};
int *rout;
for (i = 0; i < 6; i++) {
row[0] = i;
row[1] += i;
rout = put_off(row);
printf("%d (%p): [%d, %d]\n", i, (void *) rout, rout[0], rout[1]);
}
return 0;
}
Output:
0 (0x804a02c): [0, 0]
1 (0x804a034): [0, 0]
2 (0x804a024): [0, 1]
3 (0x804a02c): [1, 2]
4 (0x804a034): [2, 4]
5 (0x804a024): [3, 7]
Note that the value of border never changes, so the compiler can optimize that away. This is different from what you might initially want to use: const int (*border)[3]: that declares border as a pointer to an array of 3 integers that will not change value as long as the variable exists. However, that pointer may be pointed to any other such array at any time. We want that kind of behaviour for the argument, instead (because this function does not change any of those integers). Declaration follows use.
(p.s.: feel free to improve this sample!)
typedef int (*PointerToIntArray)[];
typedef int *ArrayOfIntPointers[];
As a rule of thumb, right unary operators (like [], (), etc) take preference over left ones. So, int *(*ptr)()[]; would be a pointer that points to a function that returns an array of pointers to int (get the right operators as soon as you can as you get out of the parenthesis)
I think we can use the simple rule ..
example int * (*ptr)()[];
start from ptr
" ptr is a pointer to "
go towards right ..its ")" now go left its a "("
come out go right "()" so
" to a function which takes no arguments " go left "and returns a pointer " go right "to
an array" go left " of integers "
Here's an interesting website that explains how to read complex types in C:
http://www.unixwiz.net/techtips/reading-cdecl.html
Here's how I interpret it:
int *something[n];
Note on precedence: array subscript operator ([]) has higher priority than
dereference operator (*).
So, here we will apply the [] before *, making the statement equivalent to:
int *(something[i]);
Note on how a declaration makes sense: int num means num is an int, int *ptr or int (*ptr) means, (value at ptr) is
an int, which makes ptr a pointer to int.
This can be read as, (value of the (value at ith index of the something)) is an integer. So, (value at the ith index of something) is an (integer pointer), which makes the something an array of integer pointers.
In the second one,
int (*something)[n];
To make sense out of this statement, you must be familiar with this fact:
Note on pointer representation of array: somethingElse[i] is equivalent to *(somethingElse + i)
So, replacing somethingElse with (*something), we get *(*something + i), which is an integer as per declaration. So, (*something) given us an array, which makes something equivalent to (pointer to an array).
I guess the second declaration is confusing to many. Here's an easy way to understand it.
Lets have an array of integers, i.e. int B[8].
Let's also have a variable A which points to B. Now, value at A is B, i.e. (*A) == B. Hence A points to an array of integers. In your question, arr is similar to A.
Similarly, in int* (*C) [8], C is a pointer to an array of pointers to integer.
int *arr1[5]
In this declaration, arr1 is an array of 5 pointers to integers.
Reason: Square brackets have higher precedence over * (dereferncing operator).
And in this type, number of rows are fixed (5 here), but number of columns is variable.
int (*arr2)[5]
In this declaration, arr2 is a pointer to an integer array of 5 elements.
Reason: Here, () brackets have higher precedence than [].
And in this type, number of rows is variable, but the number of columns is fixed (5 here).
In pointer to an integer if pointer is incremented then it goes next integer.
in array of pointer if pointer is incremented it jumps to next array