¡@
c++ Programming Glossary: reinterprethttp://stackoverflow.com/questions/11219159/make-interchangeable-class-types-via-pointer-casting-only-without-having-to-all Node AccessorFoo createViaFactory Node AccessorBar barPtr reinterpret_cast Node AccessorBar fooPtr Under the hood the factory method.. actually making a NodeBase class and then using a similar reinterpret_cast to return it as a Node AccessorFoo . The easy way to avoid.. Node AccessorFoo createViaFactory Node AccessorBar barPtr reinterpret_cast Node AccessorBar fooPtr Seems like there would be some..
reinterpret_cast to void* not working with function pointers http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1304736/reinterpret-cast-to-void-not-working-with-function-pointers to void not working with function pointers I want to reinterpret.. to void not working with function pointers I want to reinterpret cast a function pointer into a void variable. The type of the.. sample code class Test int a int main Test p void a void f reinterpret_cast void p The above code works well with Visual Studio x86..
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1632600/memory-layout-c-objects asjusts the object's pointer in memory with an offset and reinterpret kind of allows us to do anything with this pointer. I dont really..
How to perform a bitwise operation on floating point numbers http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1723575/how-to-perform-a-bitwise-operation-on-floating-point-numbers by the floating point number. For that you need to reinterpret the floating point object as an array of unsigned char objects.. of unsigned char objects as in float f 5 unsigned char c reinterpret_cast unsigned char f inspect memory from c 0 to c sizeof f 1.. memory from c 0 to c sizeof f 1 And please don't try to reinterpret a float object as an int object as other answers suggest. That..
casting via void* instead of using reinterpret_cast http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1863069/casting-via-void-instead-of-using-reinterpret-cast via void instead of using reinterpret_cast I'm reading a book and I found that reinterpret_cast should.. reinterpret_cast I'm reading a book and I found that reinterpret_cast should not be used directly but rather casting to void.. pv p1 T2 p2 static_cast T2 pv instead of T1 p1 ... T2 p2 reinterpret_cast T2 p1 However I can't find an explanation why is this better..
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/285723/c-for-a-c-sharp-developer from 42.0f to 42 but simply take the same bit pattern and reinterpret it as if it had been something else . It is usually not portable.. not portable and in fact guarantees less than I just said. reinterpret_cast U T For adding or removing const ness. You can't call a..
Should I use static_cast or reinterpret_cast when casting a void* to whatever http://stackoverflow.com/questions/310451/should-i-use-static-cast-or-reinterpret-cast-when-casting-a-void-to-whatever I use static_cast or reinterpret_cast when casting a void to whatever Both static_cast and reinterpret_cast.. when casting a void to whatever Both static_cast and reinterpret_cast seem to work fine for casting void to another pointer type... reason to favor one over the other c pointers static cast reinterpret cast share improve this question You should not use reinterpret_cast..
Why do we need “this pointer adjustor thunk”? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/3481548/why-do-we-need-this-pointer-adjustor-thunk to a pointer to base including implicit casts but not reinterpret casts that would cause UB and potential death the value of the..
“dereferencing type-punned pointer will break strict-aliasing rules” warning http://stackoverflow.com/questions/4163126/dereferencing-type-punned-pointer-will-break-strict-aliasing-rules-warning . Something like this enum foo ... ... foo foobar int pi reinterpret_cast int foobar When compiling the code g 4.1.2 I get the following.. You could use a union to represent the memory you need to reinterpret. You could use a reinterpret_cast . You could cast via char.. the memory you need to reinterpret. You could use a reinterpret_cast . You could cast via char at the point where you reinterpret..
Why do we have reinterpret_cast in C++ when two chained static_cast can do its job? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5025843/why-do-we-have-reinterpret-cast-in-c-when-two-chained-static-cast-can-do-its-j do we have reinterpret_cast in C when two chained static_cast can do its job Say I.. static_cast char static_cast void a choice 1 char buffer reinterpret_cast char a choice 2 Both work fine. convert back A pA static_cast.. A pA static_cast A static_cast void buffer choice 1 A pA reinterpret_cast A buffer choice 2 Even this works fine So why do we have..
Converting from signed char to unsigned char and back again? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5040920/converting-from-signed-char-to-unsigned-char-and-back-again the new cast style which includes static_cast and reinterpret_cast There's two things you can mean by saying conversion from.. and 255 for bit value 0b11111111 this is accomplished with reinterpret_cast. Now for the two's complement representation this happens.. a static cast to unsigned char would make this 129 while a reinterpret_cast would make this 128. Additionally in ones' complement the..
Why is it allowed to cast a pointer to a reference? http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5924248/why-is-it-allowed-to-cast-a-pointer-to-a-reference to cast a pointer to a reference with a C style cast or reinterpret_cast int main char c 'A' char pc c char c1 char pc char c2 reinterpret_cast.. int main char c 'A' char pc c char c1 char pc char c2 reinterpret_cast char pc The above code compiles without any warning or.. share improve this question Well that's the purpose of reinterpret_cast As the name suggests the purpose of that cast is to reinterpret..
C++ When should we prefer to use a two chained static_cast over reinterpret_cast http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6594395/c-when-should-we-prefer-to-use-a-two-chained-static-cast-over-reinterpret-cast should we prefer to use a two chained static_cast over reinterpret_cast First of all this is not a duplicate of Why do we have.. First of all this is not a duplicate of Why do we have reinterpret_cast in C when two chained static_cast can do it's job . I know.. use even two chained static_cast to achieve that what reinterpret_cast does. But is there any situation where I should prefer..
What is the difference between static_cast and reinterpret_cast? [duplicate] http://stackoverflow.com/questions/6855686/what-is-the-difference-between-static-cast-and-reinterpret-cast is the difference between static_cast and reinterpret_cast duplicate Possible Duplicate When should static_cast dynamic_cast.. Duplicate When should static_cast dynamic_cast and reinterpret_cast be used I'm using c function in c where a structure passed.. data Testitem ti static_cast Testitem data and when i use reinterpret_cast it does the same job casting the struct wen i use Testitem..
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9964418/strict-aliasing-and-alignment simultaneously active Workarounds The only standard way to reinterpret the bits of one object as the bits of an object of some other..
|