I'm trying to insert a pointer object to a map through emplace() but it does not work.I've created a simple representation of the problem below. I'm trying to insert to newFooList pointer object type Foo*.
Is (*pointer)->name the same as pointer->name or (*pointer).name?In C, the a->b operator is a shorthand for (*a).b.
The "const" here is the cause of the compilation problem. However, having implemented an STL tree myself, I can't understand why.
Consider the following code:Now, does the Standard guarantee that p2_42 points to p2? If not, is it always true on Windows, Linux or webassembly heap?
According to the first answer in this article: Explicitly deleting a shared_ptrIs it possible to force delete a std::shared_ptr and the object it manages like below code?
I'm having a hard time understanding how to tell between dangling pointers and memory leaks. I have a few questions on a recent assignment that are puzzling me, and after reading into it, I am still puzzled. I don't want someone to do my homework for me, I want to...
So I am a litle confused with the diferences between int array vs int * array.Essentialy when I do int array (100 it's just an example of an int), I just reserved space in memory for 100 ints, but I can do int * array and I didn't specify any...
While checking the references for another question, I noticed an odd clause in C++11, at [expr.rel] ¶3:
I'm still confusing where to place const in pointers with more than one indirection. Can someone clarify?
I want to know the size allocated to a pointer.So I found this answer : how can i know the allocated memory size of pointer variable in c