int *pointer;
int* pointer;

Quote:Is `int* p;` right or is `int *p;` right?
Both are "right" in the sense that both are valid C and C++ and both have exactly the same meaning. As far as the language definitions and the compilers are concerned we could just as well say `int*p;` or `int * p;`

The choice between `int* p;` and `int *p;` is not about right and wrong, but about style and emphasis. C emphasized expressions; declarations were often considered little more than a necessary evil. C++, on the other hand, has a heavy emphasis on types.

A ``typical C programmer`` writes `int *p;` and explains it ``*p is what is the int`` emphasizing syntax, and may point to the C (and C++) declaration grammar to argue for the correctness of the style. Indeed, the * binds to the name p in the grammar.

A ``typical C++ programmer`` writes `int* p;` and explains it ``p is a pointer to an int`` emphasizing type. Indeed the type of p is int*. I clearly prefer that emphasis and see it as important for using the more advanced parts of C++ well.

The critical confusion comes (only) when people try to declare several pointers with a single declaration:

int* p, p1; // probable error: p1 is not an int*

Placing the * closer to the name does not make this kind of error significantly less likely.

int *p, p1; // probable error?

Declaring one name per declaration minimizes the problem - in particular when we initialize the variables. People are far less likely to write:

int* p = &i
int p1 = p; // error: int initialized by int*

And if they do, the compiler will complain.