So let's say:
int n = 50;
int *p = &n;
Why do we use * and not & in C? What's the key difference between * and &?
Using * to declare pointers is mostly a matter of convention, but there is a reason of consistency: the * in the declaration int *p means int is the type of *p.
It might seem more consistent to write int &p = &n as p is initialized to the address of n but this convention would not hold for double pointers: int **pp defines pp as a pointer to a pointer to an int, yet pp cannot be initialized with &(&n).
Note that int& p = n; is a valid definition in C++ for a reference to an int, which is a pointer in disguise. Modifying p would then modify n. References are implemented as pointers without the indirection notation.
C declarations follow a convention often described as “declaration mimics use”. The structure of a declaration matches (as closely as possible) the structure of an expression in the code.
For example, let’s say you have a pointer to an int named p. To access the value stored in the pointed-to object, we dereference the pointer with the unary * operator, like so:
printf( "value of what p points to is %d\n", *p );
The expression *p has type int, so we declare p as
int *p;
This conveys that the variable p has type "pointer to int", because the combination of p and the dereference operator * in the declarator yield an expression of type int.
And this is primarily why pointers aren't declared using the & operator in C, because the type of the expression &p wouldn't be int.
C++ uses the unary & operator to declare references, which are not the same thing as pointers:
void foo( int &ref )
{
ref = new_value(); // writes a new value to the actual parameter ref references
}
int main( void )
{
int x = 1;
std::cout << "x before foo = " << x << std::endl;
foo( x );
std::cout << "x after foo = " << x << std::endl;
return 0;
}
References kind of break this system - there's no &ref expression that has type int, it just notes that ref resolves to the same object as some other identifier.
C declarations are made up of two parts - a sequence of declaration specifiers (storage class specifier, type qualifier(s), type specifier(s)) followed by a sequence of (possibly initialized) declarators. Pointer-ness, array-ness, and function-ness are specified in the declarator:
declaration specifiers declarators
| |
+--------------------+----------------+ +--------+--------+
| | | |
static const volatile unsigned long int a[10], *p, f(void);
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | +––––––– function declarator
| | | | | | +––––––––––– pointer declarator
| | | | | +––––––––—–––––——–– array declarator
| | | +–––––––+––––––—+
| | | |
| | | +––––––––––––––——–––––––––––— type specifiers
| +––––––+–––––+
| |
| +–––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– type qualifiers
+–––––––––––––—––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––––– storage class specifier
This is important - there's no "pointer to" type specifier. The pointerness is specified by the declarator. If you write something like
int* a, b;
it will be parsed as
int (*a), b;
and only a will be declared as a pointer.
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