pointers
Author
is there anypoint in having dynamic allocation of variables eg *ptr and new
keyword
for only a few varibales if small size?
is dynamic allocation really only useful to create data structures at
runtime? eg array,container of pointers
It's always depends :P (Easy answer)...
A pointer doesnt contains the data, its only containning a reference (memory address) to the data.
Like you state, pointers are mainly used for dynamic allocation of arrays. But sometimes, it might be interesting, in a specific case, to hold a "reference" to the data instead of the data itself. It doesnt matters if you're storing a int, an array or a specific data structure.
A bad exemple: In olds day, in the days of DOS gaming. We were use to access the video memory directly. How did we did it, simply be defining a pointer to the video memory like this: BYTE* ptrVideoMemory = (BYTE*)0xa0000000; (if i remember right).
So, to answer your question, the size isnt the question, the usage IS!
There are plenty of better exemples, but i'm too tired to figure out one for you, sorry.
Hope this helps,
Jonathan
A pointer doesnt contains the data, its only containning a reference (memory address) to the data.
Like you state, pointers are mainly used for dynamic allocation of arrays. But sometimes, it might be interesting, in a specific case, to hold a "reference" to the data instead of the data itself. It doesnt matters if you're storing a int, an array or a specific data structure.
A bad exemple: In olds day, in the days of DOS gaming. We were use to access the video memory directly. How did we did it, simply be defining a pointer to the video memory like this: BYTE* ptrVideoMemory = (BYTE*)0xa0000000; (if i remember right).
So, to answer your question, the size isnt the question, the usage IS!
There are plenty of better exemples, but i'm too tired to figure out one for you, sorry.
Hope this helps,
Jonathan
You can use it really for anything. But is there any point?
Sometimes, no. I mean if you're calling function B from function A and you need to pass a pointer to an integer, but the integer is only going to be used in function A, then no, there's no point.
Dynamic allocation is most useful by creating abstract data structures. But, you really have to look at it and see if it makes sense. I mean, if you're only using the variable for a function or two, then there's not really any point.
On the other hand, if you have an object that is expensive (memory-wise or computationally) to create and you'll be using it more than once, then yes, you should use dynamic memory.
But, after you code more things, you'll get a feeling for it. You'll find that for one particular thing using dynamic memory would be overkill and feels unwieldy, but for other things it will make perfect sense.
Sometimes, no. I mean if you're calling function B from function A and you need to pass a pointer to an integer, but the integer is only going to be used in function A, then no, there's no point.
Dynamic allocation is most useful by creating abstract data structures. But, you really have to look at it and see if it makes sense. I mean, if you're only using the variable for a function or two, then there's not really any point.
On the other hand, if you have an object that is expensive (memory-wise or computationally) to create and you'll be using it more than once, then yes, you should use dynamic memory.
But, after you code more things, you'll get a feeling for it. You'll find that for one particular thing using dynamic memory would be overkill and feels unwieldy, but for other things it will make perfect sense.
Author
OK so with c++ when using pointers for dynamic allocation at runtime, like a database type program. I am talking about a user adding records of an unkown amount at runtime, so pointers would be the most useful.
Would you creat an pointer array of objects say, or maybe a container of object pointers, as the best solution (anything but a linked list).
Would you creat an pointer array of objects say, or maybe a container of object pointers, as the best solution (anything but a linked list).
There are also simply things you can't do without dynamic allocation.
For example class inheritance in cpp.
For example class inheritance in cpp.
class A {};class B : public A {};A a1, *a2;B b1, *b2;//you can't do thisa1 = b1;//but this you cana2 = b2;Quote:Original post by jagguy
OK so with c++ when using pointers for dynamic allocation at runtime, like a database type program. I am talking about a user adding records of an unkown amount at runtime, so pointers would be the most useful.
Would you creat an pointer array of objects say, or maybe a container of object pointers, as the best solution (anything but a linked list).
Humm, im not sure i understand right.
First, when you are using the new operator the size to be allocated MUST be know. If the size isn't know, the best approch is to use some kind of containers (linkedlist, array, hashmap, STL stuff...).
Second, since as state in 1st, the size must be know at the time of allocation, if you want to add more values to the array, you will need to reallocate memory. (Costly operation)
Check out the exemple i write for you in the "other" thread :P
Jonathan
Author
Quote:Original post by LowRadQuote:Original post by jagguy
OK so with c++ when using pointers for dynamic allocation at runtime, like a database type program. I am talking about a user adding records of an unkown amount at runtime, so pointers would be the most useful.
Would you creat an pointer array of objects say, or maybe a container of object pointers, as the best solution (anything but a linked list).
Humm, im not sure i understand right.
First, when you are using the new operator the size to be allocated MUST be know. If the size isn't know, the best approch is to use some kind of containers (linkedlist, array, hashmap, STL stuff...).
Second, since as state in 1st, the size must be know at the time of allocation, if you want to add more values to the array, you will need to reallocate memory. (Costly operation)
Check out the exemple i write for you in the "other" thread :P
Jonathan
Let me try to explain what i mean. Say I have a number of objects I want to store at runtime, and I don't know how many objects i will need like in a database. I use an array of objects using dynamic allocation so each object is a pointer , and to access each record I simply use a loop.
Now, the problem is i don't know the size of the array to create , but I declare an array a really big size just in case.
1)How do i add more values to an array if I outgrow the initial size?
2)Are using containers a better option, but is a container full of dynamically created objects (pointers) the thing to do.
Ok it's clear now...
Like i said, it is possible to "reallocate" space to outgrow the original array, but this is a very expensive operation (a new allocation then a copy). The solution is to use any kind of list. There's STL, Boost or your own list.
I need to verify this, i know in C you use malloc, realloc and free. Dont remember for Cpp.
Humm, containers/list/stl/... is the solution to your problem. I don't see inefficient memory usage in this. Allocating 1000 object when you just need 800 is a waste of memory.
Are you doing something like:
1) MyObject* myObjects = new MyObject[10000];
or
2) MyObject **ppMyObjectArray = new MyObject*[100];
1. is allocating an array of object, then storing the address of the first element into myObjects. BUT, each element ISNT a pointer to an MyObject.. each element IS a MyObject!
2. is allocating an array of pointers to MyObject objects.
Regards,
Jonathan
Quote:
1)How do i add more values to an array if I outgrow the initial size?
Like i said, it is possible to "reallocate" space to outgrow the original array, but this is a very expensive operation (a new allocation then a copy). The solution is to use any kind of list. There's STL, Boost or your own list.
I need to verify this, i know in C you use malloc, realloc and free. Dont remember for Cpp.
Quote:
2)Are using containers a better option?, but if i remember it doesn't use pointers well and that would make it memory inefficient for a database scenario (correct me if i am wrong).
Humm, containers/list/stl/... is the solution to your problem. I don't see inefficient memory usage in this. Allocating 1000 object when you just need 800 is a waste of memory.
Quote:
I use an array of objects using dynamic allocation so each object is a pointer
Are you doing something like:
1) MyObject* myObjects = new MyObject[10000];
or
2) MyObject **ppMyObjectArray = new MyObject*[100];
1. is allocating an array of object, then storing the address of the first element into myObjects. BUT, each element ISNT a pointer to an MyObject.. each element IS a MyObject!
2. is allocating an array of pointers to MyObject objects.
Regards,
Jonathan
Author
let me say it this way, if you create a database (each record is stored in an object), then how do program this for an unknown size of objects.
Do you use -
An array of dynamically allocated objects and just create a very large size array so you can never really hit the limit.
or
A container with dynamically allocated objects, which may prove confusing .
or aother solution i don't know about.
Do you use -
An array of dynamically allocated objects and just create a very large size array so you can never really hit the limit.
or
A container with dynamically allocated objects, which may prove confusing .
or aother solution i don't know about.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
