Pass array by value

[Berk Birand]

Hi,

I am just learning about the array/pointer duality in C/C++. I couldn't
help wondering, is there a way to pass an array by value? It seems like
the only way to do is to pass it by reference??

Thanks,
BB

[Artie Gold]

Berk Birand wrote:

Hi,

I am just learning about the array/pointer duality in C/C++. I couldn't
help wondering, is there a way to pass an array by value? It seems like
the only way to do is to pass it by reference??

Thanks,
BB

When an array is passed in either C or C++ (different, oft subtly
incompatible languages with a common subset), it decays into a pointer
to its first element; the pointer is passed by value.

The only way to simulate passing an array by value would be to wrap it
in a struct.

HTH,
--ag

--
Artie Gold -- Austin, Texas
http://it-matters.blogspot.com (new post 12/5)
http://www.cafepress.com/goldsays

[Peter Koch Larsen]

Do not use an array - use std::vector instead.
"Berk Birand" <gr******@yahoo .com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1107492506 .5f08d4c39f8943 27dfa88bc7c283a 9ce@teranews...

Hi,

I am just learning about the array/pointer duality in C/C++. I couldn't
help wondering, is there a way to pass an array by value? It seems like
the only way to do is to pass it by reference?? Also do not use pointers if you can avoid them.
Thanks,
BB

[Berk Birand]

Peter Koch Larsen wrote:

Do not use an array - use std::vector instead.
"Berk Birand" <gr******@yahoo .com> skrev i en meddelelse
news:1107492506 .5f08d4c39f8943 27dfa88bc7c283a 9ce@teranews...

Hi,

I am just learning about the array/pointer duality in C/C++. I couldn't
help wondering, is there a way to pass an array by value? It seems like
the only way to do is to pass it by reference??

Also do not use pointers if you can avoid them.

Thanks,
BB

Thanks to both for your answers. Also another question that pops in my
mind is whether to use references or pointers in function headers. Is it
better practice to declare a function as, say:

void afunc(int& i);

or is it better to declare it as

void afunc(int* i);

I know that in the second case, one has to explicitly dereference i
whenever one wants to access it. But this can be considered a good
thing, as it makes it more obvious that you are manipulating pointers,
and the values are going to change. On the other hand, it's just more work!

So, what do you say about this?

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Berk Birand wrote:

I am just learning about the array/pointer duality in C/C++.
I couldn't help wondering,
"Is there a way to pass an array by value?"
It seems like the only way to do is to pass it by reference?

Actually, you pass a pointer to the first element of the array.

The only way to pass an array by value is to encapsulate it in a struct:

#include <iostream>

struct Array {
int A[10];
};

void f(Array a) {
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
std::cout << ' ' << A[j];
std::cout << std::endl;
}

[E. Robert Tisdale]

Berk Birand wrote:

Also another question that pops in my mind mind
is whether to use references or pointers in function headers.
Is it better practice to declare a function as, say:

void afunc(int& i);

Or is it better to declare it as

void afunc(int* i);

I know that, in the second case,
one has to explicitly dereference i whenever one wants to access it.
But this can be considered a good thing,
as it makes it more obvious that
you are manipulating pointers, and the values are going to change.
On the other hand, it's just more work!

Avoid functions that modify their arguments.
Pass a const reference and return a result by value. Write

int afunct(const int& i);

or

int afunct(const int* p);

instead. I pass small objects by value

int afunct(int i);

but you can easily substitute a function declaration/definition
that passes a const reference

in afunct(const int& i);

without breaking any applications that call afunct.
You need only recompile and relink.

[puzzlecracker]

The only way to pass an array by value is to encapsulate it in a struct:
#include <iostream>

struct Array {
int A[10];
};

void f(Array a) {
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
std::cout << ' ' << A[j];
std::cout << std::endl;
}

this is not going to work - you need to define a copy constructor,
otherwise you still passing an address fo the first element i.e. not
copied first element. please correct me if I am wrong!

[puzzlecracker]

puzzlecracker wrote:

The only way to pass an array by value is to encapsulate it in a

struct:

#include <iostream>

struct Array {
int A[10];
};

void f(Array a) {
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
std::cout << ' ' << A[j];
std::cout << std::endl;
}

this is not going to work - you need to define a copy constructor,
otherwise you still passing an address fo the first element i.e. not
copied first element. please correct me if I am wrong!

#include <iostream>

struct Array {
int A[10];
Arrray(const Array &a)
{
if(a)
while(*A++=*a++ );

else
A=0;

}

};

void f(Array a) {
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
std::cout << ' ' << A[j];
std::cout<<std: :endl;

[E. Robert Tisdale]

puzzlecracker wrote:

The only way to pass an array by value is to encapsulate it in a
struct:

#include <iostream>

struct Array {
int A[10];
};

void f(Array a) {
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
std::cout << ' ' << A[j];
std::cout << std::endl;
}

this is not going to work - you need to define a copy constructor,
otherwise you still passing an address fo the first element i.e. not
copied first element. Please correct me if I am wrong!

You are wrong.

You can verify this by writing a simple test program:
cat main.cpp

#include <iostream>

struct Array {
int A[10];
};

void f(Array a) {
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
std::cout << ' ' << A[j];
std::cout << std::endl;
}

int main(int argc, char* argv[]) {
Array a;
int* A = a.A;
for (size_t j = 0; j < 10; ++j)
A[j] = j;
f(a);
return 0;
}

then compiling and running it.

[Siemel Naran]

"Berk Birand" <gr******@yahoo .com> wrote in message

Thanks to both for your answers. Also another question that pops in my
mind is whether to use references or pointers in function headers. Is it
better practice to declare a function as, say:

void afunc(int& i);

or is it better to declare it as

void afunc(int* i);
If one is allowed to pass in a NULL integer (not zero, which is something),
meaning that 'i' is not supplied, then you have to choose the second
version. Otherwise prefer the first method as it makes it clear that the
caller has to pass in a valid integer.
I know that in the second case, one has to explicitly dereference i
whenever one wants to access it. But this can be considered a good
thing, as it makes it more obvious that you are manipulating pointers,
and the values are going to change. On the other hand, it's just more

work!

It's more work to type, not to the end program usually. Most compilers
implement references as pointers, except the pointer notation is not visible
to the end user. So both ways are on an equal footing, and which way is
better is your choice.