问题
In c++ we know that for a pointer of class we use (->) arrow operator to access the members of that class like here:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class myclass{
private:
int a,b;
public:
void setdata(int i,int j){
a=i;
b=j;
}
};
int main() {
myclass *p;
p = new myclass;
p->setdata(5,6);
return 0;
}
Then I create a array of "myclass".
p=new myclass[10];
but then, when I go to access myclass
members through (->) arrow operator, I get following error
base operand of '->' has non-pointer type 'myclass'
but while I access class members through (.) operator it works. These things make me confused. Why for array of class I have to use (.) operator.
回答1:
you should read about difference between pointers and reference that might help you understand your problem.
In short, the difference is:
when you declare myclass *p
it's a pointer and you can access it's members with ->
, because p
points to memory location.
But as soon as you call p=new myclass[10];
p
starts to point to array and when you call p[n]
you get a reference, which members must be accessed using .
.
But if you use p->member = smth
that would be the same as if you called p[0].member = smth
, because number in []
is an offset from p
to where search for the next array member, for example (p + 5)->member = smth
would be same as p[5].member = smth
回答2:
Note that for a pointer variable x
myclass *x;
*x
means "get the object that x points to"x->setdata(1, 2)
is the same as(*x).setdata(1, 2)
and finallyx[n]
means "get the n-th object in an array".
So for example x->setdata(1, 2)
is the same as x[0].setdata(1, 2)
.
回答3:
Because by using [] like p[3] you are already dereferencing the pointer to array + index shift. After that you have to use ".", since p[3] is an object, not a pointer.
回答4:
After...
MyClass* p = new myclass[10];
...p is a pointer to an array of MyClass objects. The "pointer to an array" thing has to be delt with first. Whenever you have a pointer to an array, p[n]
effectively gives you a reference to the nth element in the array, so you effectively have a MyClass&
. That's why .
is then needed to access MyClass
members ala p[n].member
, and why the pointer-specific ->
notation is erroneous in this case....
Note that p->member
(for any member) is still valid and equivalent to p[0].member
, so you can only use it for accessing the first element in the array. I strongly recommend you don't use it at all whenever you're in a programmatic context where 'p' is known to be pointer to the array, as it hides the fact that p
is an array. Sometimes though you may create another pointer - say q
- with the purpose of refering to a single array element - may or may not be [0]
- and in those situation's it's fair to use q->member
. Variables like q
may be used for iteration over the array too. But, sometime you're going to need to delete[] p;
- so you won't tend to change p
beforehands... you don't want to lose track of the p[0]
address or delete[] p;
will be Undefined Behaviour (which is allowed to be implementation defined and happens to be on Windows if p
still points within the array, but won't be portable).
回答5:
myclass *ptr;
ptr = new myclass(); // ptr points to a single object
ptr->doSomething(); // calls doSomething on the object _pointed to_
ptr = new myclass[10]; // ptr points to multiple objects
ptr->doSomething(); // calls doSomething on the first object _pointed to_
(ptr+1)->doSomething(); // calls doSomething on the second object _pointed to_
auto val = ptr[2]; // fetches a reference to the second _object_ to val.
val.doSomething(); // calls doSomething on the _object reference_ val.
In other words, when indexing the array to fetch the n'th element, you're not fetching a pointer to the n'th element, you're fetching a reference to the actual object, and the members of that need to be accessed using .
syntax.
回答6:
Perhaps its insightful to consider that, given
myclass obj;
auto p = &obj; // avoid `new` with plain pointers. That combination is
// safer replaced by unique_ptr or std::vector.
the following will all work and are equivalent:
p->setdata(5, 6);
(*p).setdata(5, 6);
p[0].setdata(5, 6);
0[p].setdata(5, 6);
Showing that []
is really a pointer-dereferencing operator, just with the extra functionality that you can add offsets into a plain C-array.
It's generally questionable to use C-arrays in C++ code; the obvious alternative to your example is std::vector
:
std::vector<myclass> array(10);
Here, array[n]
can be used much like previously p[n]
, but
- You don't get any stupid pointer-ideas, because there are no pointers in the interface
- You get proper automatic memory management, i.e. when the array goes out of scope it automatically deletes the objects and its memory
- You can get bounds-checks if you want (
array.at(n)
) - You can easily loop over the whole array, with (C++11)
for(auto& obj: array){...}
.
来源:https://stackoverflow.com/questions/17716293/arrow-operator-and-dot-operator-class-pointer