Passing an array by reference












141















How does passing a statically allocated array by reference work?



void foo(int (&myArray)[100])
{
}

int main()
{
int a[100];
foo(a);
}


Does (&myArray)[100] have any meaning or its just a syntax to pass any array by reference?
I don't understand separate parenthesis followed by big brackets here. Thanks.










share|improve this question

























  • Is there any Rvalue to Lvalue relation with the function parameters?

    – John DB
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:16











  • possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – AnT
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:25











  • Possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – anatolyg
    Jul 8 '17 at 23:07
















141















How does passing a statically allocated array by reference work?



void foo(int (&myArray)[100])
{
}

int main()
{
int a[100];
foo(a);
}


Does (&myArray)[100] have any meaning or its just a syntax to pass any array by reference?
I don't understand separate parenthesis followed by big brackets here. Thanks.










share|improve this question

























  • Is there any Rvalue to Lvalue relation with the function parameters?

    – John DB
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:16











  • possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – AnT
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:25











  • Possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – anatolyg
    Jul 8 '17 at 23:07














141












141








141


67






How does passing a statically allocated array by reference work?



void foo(int (&myArray)[100])
{
}

int main()
{
int a[100];
foo(a);
}


Does (&myArray)[100] have any meaning or its just a syntax to pass any array by reference?
I don't understand separate parenthesis followed by big brackets here. Thanks.










share|improve this question
















How does passing a statically allocated array by reference work?



void foo(int (&myArray)[100])
{
}

int main()
{
int a[100];
foo(a);
}


Does (&myArray)[100] have any meaning or its just a syntax to pass any array by reference?
I don't understand separate parenthesis followed by big brackets here. Thanks.







c++ arrays






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Nov 8 '17 at 20:40









Sean Bone

1,11621837




1,11621837










asked Apr 20 '11 at 0:05









John DBJohn DB

706263




706263













  • Is there any Rvalue to Lvalue relation with the function parameters?

    – John DB
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:16











  • possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – AnT
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:25











  • Possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – anatolyg
    Jul 8 '17 at 23:07



















  • Is there any Rvalue to Lvalue relation with the function parameters?

    – John DB
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:16











  • possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – AnT
    Apr 20 '11 at 0:25











  • Possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

    – anatolyg
    Jul 8 '17 at 23:07

















Is there any Rvalue to Lvalue relation with the function parameters?

– John DB
Apr 20 '11 at 0:16





Is there any Rvalue to Lvalue relation with the function parameters?

– John DB
Apr 20 '11 at 0:16













possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

– AnT
Apr 20 '11 at 0:25





possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

– AnT
Apr 20 '11 at 0:25













Possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

– anatolyg
Jul 8 '17 at 23:07





Possible duplicate of What is useful about a reference-to-array parameter?

– anatolyg
Jul 8 '17 at 23:07












4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















188














It's a syntax for array references - you need to use (&array) to clarify to the compiler that you want a reference to an array, rather than the (invalid) array of references int & array[100];.



EDIT: Some clarification.



void foo(int * x);
void foo(int x[100]);
void foo(int x);


These three are different ways of declaring the same function. They're all treated as taking an int * parameter, you can pass any size array to them.



void foo(int (&x)[100]);


This only accepts arrays of 100 integers. You can safely use sizeof on x



void foo(int & x[100]); // error


This is parsed as an "array of references" - which isn't legal.






share|improve this answer


























  • Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

    – Vorac
    Jan 7 '16 at 13:10








  • 4





    Aha, found out why.

    – Vorac
    Jan 8 '16 at 13:51






  • 2





    Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:52








  • 2





    It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

    – philipxy
    May 6 '17 at 3:10



















39














It's just the required syntax:



void Func(int (&myArray)[100])


^ Pass array of 100 int by reference the parameters name is myArray;



void Func(int* myArray)


^ Pass an array. Array decays to a pointer. Thus you lose size information.



void Func(int (*myFunc)(double))


^ Pass a function pointer. The function returns an int and takes a double. The parameter name is myFunc.






share|improve this answer


























  • How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

    – Shivam Arora
    Jun 29 '17 at 8:07











  • @ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

    – Martin York
    Jun 29 '17 at 15:53



















19














It is a syntax. In the function arguments int (&myArray)[100] parenthesis that enclose the &myArray are necessary. if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references and that is because the subscript operator has higher precedence over the & operator.



E.g. int &myArray[100] // array of references



So, by using type construction () you tell the compiler that you want a reference to an array of 100 integers.



E.g int (&myArray)[100] // reference of an array of 100 ints






share|improve this answer


























  • "if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

    – underscore_d
    Aug 30 '16 at 15:27













  • Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

    – Iartist93
    Dec 1 '16 at 19:32











  • Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

    – cram2208
    Nov 7 '17 at 5:43



















2














Arrays are default passed by pointers. You can try modifying an array inside a function call for better understanding.






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

    – Ulrich Eckhardt
    Jul 19 '15 at 8:50











  • @UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

    – Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
    Jul 24 '15 at 21:52






  • 5





    Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

    – user3437460
    May 27 '16 at 16:43








  • 1





    Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:14





















4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes








4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









188














It's a syntax for array references - you need to use (&array) to clarify to the compiler that you want a reference to an array, rather than the (invalid) array of references int & array[100];.



EDIT: Some clarification.



void foo(int * x);
void foo(int x[100]);
void foo(int x);


These three are different ways of declaring the same function. They're all treated as taking an int * parameter, you can pass any size array to them.



void foo(int (&x)[100]);


This only accepts arrays of 100 integers. You can safely use sizeof on x



void foo(int & x[100]); // error


This is parsed as an "array of references" - which isn't legal.






share|improve this answer


























  • Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

    – Vorac
    Jan 7 '16 at 13:10








  • 4





    Aha, found out why.

    – Vorac
    Jan 8 '16 at 13:51






  • 2





    Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:52








  • 2





    It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

    – philipxy
    May 6 '17 at 3:10
















188














It's a syntax for array references - you need to use (&array) to clarify to the compiler that you want a reference to an array, rather than the (invalid) array of references int & array[100];.



EDIT: Some clarification.



void foo(int * x);
void foo(int x[100]);
void foo(int x);


These three are different ways of declaring the same function. They're all treated as taking an int * parameter, you can pass any size array to them.



void foo(int (&x)[100]);


This only accepts arrays of 100 integers. You can safely use sizeof on x



void foo(int & x[100]); // error


This is parsed as an "array of references" - which isn't legal.






share|improve this answer


























  • Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

    – Vorac
    Jan 7 '16 at 13:10








  • 4





    Aha, found out why.

    – Vorac
    Jan 8 '16 at 13:51






  • 2





    Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:52








  • 2





    It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

    – philipxy
    May 6 '17 at 3:10














188












188








188







It's a syntax for array references - you need to use (&array) to clarify to the compiler that you want a reference to an array, rather than the (invalid) array of references int & array[100];.



EDIT: Some clarification.



void foo(int * x);
void foo(int x[100]);
void foo(int x);


These three are different ways of declaring the same function. They're all treated as taking an int * parameter, you can pass any size array to them.



void foo(int (&x)[100]);


This only accepts arrays of 100 integers. You can safely use sizeof on x



void foo(int & x[100]); // error


This is parsed as an "array of references" - which isn't legal.






share|improve this answer















It's a syntax for array references - you need to use (&array) to clarify to the compiler that you want a reference to an array, rather than the (invalid) array of references int & array[100];.



EDIT: Some clarification.



void foo(int * x);
void foo(int x[100]);
void foo(int x);


These three are different ways of declaring the same function. They're all treated as taking an int * parameter, you can pass any size array to them.



void foo(int (&x)[100]);


This only accepts arrays of 100 integers. You can safely use sizeof on x



void foo(int & x[100]); // error


This is parsed as an "array of references" - which isn't legal.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Apr 20 '11 at 0:21

























answered Apr 20 '11 at 0:07









ErikErik

67.1k9168174




67.1k9168174













  • Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

    – Vorac
    Jan 7 '16 at 13:10








  • 4





    Aha, found out why.

    – Vorac
    Jan 8 '16 at 13:51






  • 2





    Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:52








  • 2





    It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

    – philipxy
    May 6 '17 at 3:10



















  • Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

    – Vorac
    Jan 7 '16 at 13:10








  • 4





    Aha, found out why.

    – Vorac
    Jan 8 '16 at 13:51






  • 2





    Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:52








  • 2





    It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

    – philipxy
    May 6 '17 at 3:10

















Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

– Vorac
Jan 7 '16 at 13:10







Why can't we have an array of references e.g. int a, b, c; int arr[3] = {a, b, c};?

– Vorac
Jan 7 '16 at 13:10






4




4





Aha, found out why.

– Vorac
Jan 8 '16 at 13:51





Aha, found out why.

– Vorac
Jan 8 '16 at 13:51




2




2





Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

– zl9394
Feb 11 '17 at 0:52







Could someone explain why void foo(int & x[100]); is parsed as "array of references" please? Is it because the "from-right-to-left" rule? If yes, it seems to be not consistent with how void foo(int (&x)[100]); is parsed as "a reference to a array". Thanks in advance.

– zl9394
Feb 11 '17 at 0:52






2




2





It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

– philipxy
May 6 '17 at 3:10





It's not right to left, it's inside out, and binds tighter than &.

– philipxy
May 6 '17 at 3:10













39














It's just the required syntax:



void Func(int (&myArray)[100])


^ Pass array of 100 int by reference the parameters name is myArray;



void Func(int* myArray)


^ Pass an array. Array decays to a pointer. Thus you lose size information.



void Func(int (*myFunc)(double))


^ Pass a function pointer. The function returns an int and takes a double. The parameter name is myFunc.






share|improve this answer


























  • How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

    – Shivam Arora
    Jun 29 '17 at 8:07











  • @ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

    – Martin York
    Jun 29 '17 at 15:53
















39














It's just the required syntax:



void Func(int (&myArray)[100])


^ Pass array of 100 int by reference the parameters name is myArray;



void Func(int* myArray)


^ Pass an array. Array decays to a pointer. Thus you lose size information.



void Func(int (*myFunc)(double))


^ Pass a function pointer. The function returns an int and takes a double. The parameter name is myFunc.






share|improve this answer


























  • How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

    – Shivam Arora
    Jun 29 '17 at 8:07











  • @ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

    – Martin York
    Jun 29 '17 at 15:53














39












39








39







It's just the required syntax:



void Func(int (&myArray)[100])


^ Pass array of 100 int by reference the parameters name is myArray;



void Func(int* myArray)


^ Pass an array. Array decays to a pointer. Thus you lose size information.



void Func(int (*myFunc)(double))


^ Pass a function pointer. The function returns an int and takes a double. The parameter name is myFunc.






share|improve this answer















It's just the required syntax:



void Func(int (&myArray)[100])


^ Pass array of 100 int by reference the parameters name is myArray;



void Func(int* myArray)


^ Pass an array. Array decays to a pointer. Thus you lose size information.



void Func(int (*myFunc)(double))


^ Pass a function pointer. The function returns an int and takes a double. The parameter name is myFunc.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Mar 16 '16 at 18:07









Nayuki

14.2k53765




14.2k53765










answered Apr 20 '11 at 0:08









Martin YorkMartin York

197k66266482




197k66266482













  • How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

    – Shivam Arora
    Jun 29 '17 at 8:07











  • @ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

    – Martin York
    Jun 29 '17 at 15:53



















  • How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

    – Shivam Arora
    Jun 29 '17 at 8:07











  • @ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

    – Martin York
    Jun 29 '17 at 15:53

















How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

– Shivam Arora
Jun 29 '17 at 8:07





How do we pass a variable size array as a reference ?

– Shivam Arora
Jun 29 '17 at 8:07













@ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

– Martin York
Jun 29 '17 at 15:53





@ShivamArora You templateize the function and make the size a template parameter.

– Martin York
Jun 29 '17 at 15:53











19














It is a syntax. In the function arguments int (&myArray)[100] parenthesis that enclose the &myArray are necessary. if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references and that is because the subscript operator has higher precedence over the & operator.



E.g. int &myArray[100] // array of references



So, by using type construction () you tell the compiler that you want a reference to an array of 100 integers.



E.g int (&myArray)[100] // reference of an array of 100 ints






share|improve this answer


























  • "if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

    – underscore_d
    Aug 30 '16 at 15:27













  • Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

    – Iartist93
    Dec 1 '16 at 19:32











  • Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

    – cram2208
    Nov 7 '17 at 5:43
















19














It is a syntax. In the function arguments int (&myArray)[100] parenthesis that enclose the &myArray are necessary. if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references and that is because the subscript operator has higher precedence over the & operator.



E.g. int &myArray[100] // array of references



So, by using type construction () you tell the compiler that you want a reference to an array of 100 integers.



E.g int (&myArray)[100] // reference of an array of 100 ints






share|improve this answer


























  • "if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

    – underscore_d
    Aug 30 '16 at 15:27













  • Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

    – Iartist93
    Dec 1 '16 at 19:32











  • Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

    – cram2208
    Nov 7 '17 at 5:43














19












19








19







It is a syntax. In the function arguments int (&myArray)[100] parenthesis that enclose the &myArray are necessary. if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references and that is because the subscript operator has higher precedence over the & operator.



E.g. int &myArray[100] // array of references



So, by using type construction () you tell the compiler that you want a reference to an array of 100 integers.



E.g int (&myArray)[100] // reference of an array of 100 ints






share|improve this answer















It is a syntax. In the function arguments int (&myArray)[100] parenthesis that enclose the &myArray are necessary. if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references and that is because the subscript operator has higher precedence over the & operator.



E.g. int &myArray[100] // array of references



So, by using type construction () you tell the compiler that you want a reference to an array of 100 integers.



E.g int (&myArray)[100] // reference of an array of 100 ints







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited May 25 '15 at 9:17









BugShotGG

2,76643751




2,76643751










answered Apr 20 '11 at 1:06









cpxcpx

8,9691569127




8,9691569127













  • "if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

    – underscore_d
    Aug 30 '16 at 15:27













  • Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

    – Iartist93
    Dec 1 '16 at 19:32











  • Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

    – cram2208
    Nov 7 '17 at 5:43



















  • "if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

    – underscore_d
    Aug 30 '16 at 15:27













  • Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

    – Iartist93
    Dec 1 '16 at 19:32











  • Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

    – cram2208
    Nov 7 '17 at 5:43

















"if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

– underscore_d
Aug 30 '16 at 15:27







"if you don't use them, you will be passing an array of references" - which of course, cannot exist, so you'd get a compile error. It's amusing to me that the operator precedence rules insist this must happen by default anyway.

– underscore_d
Aug 30 '16 at 15:27















Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

– Iartist93
Dec 1 '16 at 19:32





Is there's any more tutorial about type construction () ?

– Iartist93
Dec 1 '16 at 19:32













Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

– cram2208
Nov 7 '17 at 5:43





Thanks, I needed an explanation that included the reason about operator precedence, which gives a sense to why it should be done this way.

– cram2208
Nov 7 '17 at 5:43











2














Arrays are default passed by pointers. You can try modifying an array inside a function call for better understanding.






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

    – Ulrich Eckhardt
    Jul 19 '15 at 8:50











  • @UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

    – Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
    Jul 24 '15 at 21:52






  • 5





    Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

    – user3437460
    May 27 '16 at 16:43








  • 1





    Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:14


















2














Arrays are default passed by pointers. You can try modifying an array inside a function call for better understanding.






share|improve this answer





















  • 2





    Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

    – Ulrich Eckhardt
    Jul 19 '15 at 8:50











  • @UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

    – Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
    Jul 24 '15 at 21:52






  • 5





    Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

    – user3437460
    May 27 '16 at 16:43








  • 1





    Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:14
















2












2








2







Arrays are default passed by pointers. You can try modifying an array inside a function call for better understanding.






share|improve this answer















Arrays are default passed by pointers. You can try modifying an array inside a function call for better understanding.







share|improve this answer














share|improve this answer



share|improve this answer








edited Sep 14 '17 at 18:59

























answered Jul 1 '15 at 23:07









Eduardo A. Fernández DíazEduardo A. Fernández Díaz

13111




13111








  • 2





    Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

    – Ulrich Eckhardt
    Jul 19 '15 at 8:50











  • @UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

    – Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
    Jul 24 '15 at 21:52






  • 5





    Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

    – user3437460
    May 27 '16 at 16:43








  • 1





    Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:14
















  • 2





    Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

    – Ulrich Eckhardt
    Jul 19 '15 at 8:50











  • @UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

    – Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
    Jul 24 '15 at 21:52






  • 5





    Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

    – user3437460
    May 27 '16 at 16:43








  • 1





    Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

    – zl9394
    Feb 11 '17 at 0:14










2




2





Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

– Ulrich Eckhardt
Jul 19 '15 at 8:50





Arrays can not be passed by value. If the function receives a pointer, an array decays to a pointer to its first element. I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

– Ulrich Eckhardt
Jul 19 '15 at 8:50













@UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

– Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
Jul 24 '15 at 21:52





@UlrichEckhardt I'm trying to say that "Arrays can not be passed by value" as you said before, they are default passed by reference

– Eduardo A. Fernández Díaz
Jul 24 '15 at 21:52




5




5





Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

– user3437460
May 27 '16 at 16:43







Array are neither passed by value nor reference. They are passed by pointers. If arrays are passed by reference by default, you will have no problem using sizeof on them. But that is not the case. Arrays decays to pointers when passed into a function.

– user3437460
May 27 '16 at 16:43






1




1





Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

– zl9394
Feb 11 '17 at 0:14







Arrays can be passed by reference OR by degrading to a pointer. For example, using char arr[1]; foo(char arr)., arr degrades to a pointer; while using char arr[1]; foo(char (&arr)[1]), arr is passed as a reference. It's notable that the former form is often regarded as ill-formed since the dimension is lost.

– zl9394
Feb 11 '17 at 0:14





Popular posts from this blog

Florida Star v. B. J. F.

Error while running script in elastic search , gateway timeout

Adding quotations to stringified JSON object values