Is the following well-defined:
char* charPtr = new char[42];
int* intPtr = (int*)charPtr;
charPtr++;
intPtr = (int*) charPtr;
The intPtr
isn't properly aligned (in at least one of the two cases). Is it illegal just having it there? Is it UB using it at any stage? How can you use it and how can't you?
In general, the result is unspecified (5.2.10p7) if the alignment requirements of int
are greater than those of char
, which they usually will be. The result will be a valid value of the type int *
so it can be e.g. printed as a pointer with operator<<
or converted to intptr_t
.
Because the result has an unspecified value, unless specified by the implementation it is undefined behaviour to indirect it and perform lvalue-to-rvalue conversion on the resulting int
lvalue (except in unevaluated contexts). Converting back to char *
will not necessarily round-trip.
However, if the original char *
was itself the result of a cast from int *
, then the cast to int *
counts as the second half of a round trip; in that case, the cast is defined.
In particular, in the case above where the char *
was the result of a new[]
expression, we are guaranteed (5.3.4p10) that the char *
pointer is appropriately aligned for int
, as long as sizeof(int) <= 42
. Because the new[]
expression obtains its storage from an allocation function, 3.7.4.1p2 applies; the void *
pointer can be converted
to a pointer of any complete object type with a fundamental alignment requirement and then used to access the object [...] which strongly implies, along with the note to 5.3.4p10, that the same holds for the char *
pointer returned by the new[]
expression. In this case the int *
is a pointer to an uninitialised int
object, so performing lvalue-to-rvalue conversion on its indirection is undefined (3.8p6), but assigning to its indirection is fully defined. The int
object is in the storage allocated (3.7.4.1p2) so converting the int *
back to char *
will yield the original value per 1.8p6. This does not hold for the incremented char *
pointer as unless sizeof(int) == 1
it is not the address of an int
object.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With