Why does reading into a string buffer with scanf work both with and without the ampersand (&)?
I'm a little bit confused about something. I was under the impression that the correct way of reading a C string with scanf()
went along the lines of
(never mind the possible buffer overflow, it's just a simple example)
char string[256];
scanf( "%s" , string );
However, the following seems to work too,
scanf( "%s" , &a开发者_C百科mp;string );
Is this just my compiler (gcc), pure luck, or something else?
An array "decays" into a pointer to its first element, so scanf("%s", string)
is equivalent to scanf("%s", &string[0])
. On the other hand, scanf("%s", &string)
passes a pointer-to-char[256]
, but it points to the same place.
Then scanf
, when processing the tail of its argument list, will try to pull out a char *
. That's the Right Thing when you've passed in string
or &string[0]
, but when you've passed in &string
you're depending on something that the language standard doesn't guarantee, namely that the pointers &string
and &string[0]
-- pointers to objects of different types and sizes that start at the same place -- are represented the same way.
I don't believe I've ever encountered a system on which that doesn't work, and in practice you're probably safe. None the less, it's wrong, and it could fail on some platforms. (Hypothetical example: a "debugging" implementation that includes type information with every pointer. I think the C implementation on the Symbolics "Lisp Machines" did something like this.)
I think that this below is accurate and it may help. Feel free to correct it if you find any errors. I'm new at C.
char str[]
- array of values of type char, with its own address in memory
- array of values of type char, with its own address in memory as many consecutive addresses as elements in the array
including termination null character
'\0'
&str
,&str[0]
andstr
, all three represent the same location in memory which is address of the first element of the arraystr
char *strPtr = &str[0]; //declaration and initialization
alternatively, you can split this in two:
char *strPtr; strPtr = &str[0];
strPtr
is a pointer to achar
strPtr
points at arraystr
strPtr
is a variable with its own address in memorystrPtr
is a variable that stores value of address&str[0]
strPtr
own address in memory is different from the memory address that it stores (address of array in memory a.k.a &str[0])&strPtr
represents the address of strPtr itself
I think that you could declare a pointer to a pointer as:
char **vPtr = &strPtr;
declares and initializes with address of strPtr pointer
Alternatively you could split in two:
char **vPtr;
*vPtr = &strPtr
*vPtr
points at strPtr pointer*vPtr
is a variable with its own address in memory*vPtr
is a variable that stores value of address &strPtr- final comment: you can not do
str++
,str
address is aconst
, but you can dostrPtr++
精彩评论