standards

The following program is compiled with VC++ 2012. #include <algorithm> struct A { A() : a() {} bool operator <(const A& other) const { return a <= other.a; } int a; }; int main() { A coll[8]; std::sort(&coll[0], &coll[8]); // Crash!!! } If I change return a <= other.a; to return a < other.a; then the program runs as expected with no exception. Why? xorguy std::sort requires a sorter which satisfies the strict weak ordering rule, which is explained here So, your comparer says that a < b when a == b which doesn't follow the strict weak ordering rule, it is possible that the algorithm will crash

By my reading of the C++ Standard, I have always understood that the sizes of the integral fundamental types in C++ were as follows: sizeof(char) <= sizeof(short int) <= sizeof(int) <= sizeof(long int) I deduced this from 3.9.1/2: There are four signed integer types: “signed char”, “short int”, “int”, and “long int.” In this list, each type provides at least as much storage as those preceding it in the list. Plain ints have the natural size suggested by the architecture of the execution environment Further, the size of char is described by 3.9.1/ as being: [...] large enough to store any

I know that arrays in C are just pointers to sequentially stored data. But what differences imply the difference in notation [] and *. I mean in ALL possible usage context. For example: char c[] = "test"; if you provide this instruction in a function body it will allocate the string on a stack while char* c = "test"; will point to a data (readonly) segment. Can you list all the differences between these two notations in ALL usage contexts to form a clear general view. Sergey K. According to the C99 standard: An array type describes a contiguously allocated nonempty set of objects with a

Here is a little test program: #include <iostream> class Test { public: static void DoCrash(){ std::cout<< "TEST IT!"<< std::endl; } }; int main() { Test k; k.DoCrash(); // calling a static method like a member method... std::system("pause"); return 0; } On VS2008 + SP1 (vc9) it compiles fine: the console just display "TEST IT!". As far as I know, static member methods shouldn't be called on instanced object. Am I wrong? Is this code correct from the standard point of view? If it's correct, why is that? I can't find why it would be allowed, or maybe it's to help using "static or not" method in