bugIntroducedDebugging

[u/ClipboardCopyPaste]

[u/PR8-E]

int* x = (int*) malloc(sizeof(int)); Since malloc returns void pointer you should parse it to type you use.

[u/yjlom → u/PR8-E]

void * coerces to any pointer type. This is valid: int *x = malloc(sizeof(int));. This is also valid (in C23): auto x = (int *) malloc(sizeof(int));.

[u/Mateorabi → u/yjlom]

Get off my lawn with your newfangled auto keyword. 

[u/ibevol → u/Mateorabi]

Cringe. It’s fine to use auto when the type is clear on the same line. In c++ the following is idiomatic:

auto ptr = std::make_unique<int>(42);

over specifying int twice

std::unique_ptr<int> ptr = std::make_unique<int>(42);

However, the following should not be considered idiomatic:

auto ptr = get_ambiguous_pointer();

It’s the same principle here.

[u/yjlom → u/Mateorabi]

The keyword ain't new, it's been used as a storage specifier since forever. What's new is overloading it for type inference.

[u/Mateorabi → u/yjlom]

Hey when you learned C in the 90s it’s “new”.  harumph. 

[u/yjlom → u/Mateorabi]

It's been there since the beginning, along with extern and static. You just don't tend to actually write it because it's the default inside functions and it doesn't make sense outside of them.

[u/mydogatethem → u/yjlom]

Is this different between C and C++? In C++ you absolutely cannot assign a void* to an int* without casting it. You can always do the reverse: a void* can be assigned any type of pointer.

[u/vetgirig → u/mydogatethem]

In C++ you do not really use "malloc", In C++ you use "new" instead.

[u/mydogatethem → u/vetgirig]

I mean… yes you do, but not really. There are use cases for both. Not everything is a class and not every API you call is even going to work with that buffer you pass in unless the API can free() it. See posix for example.

Anyways, that wasn’t the question I asked and is not even relevant to the question I asked.