«

Hi

I'm not that used to the stl so I ask to be on the safe side:

typedef std::vector<char> TMembuf;

TMembuf buf(1000);
char* p = &buf[0];

I have tested it and it seem to work fine just like:

char* p = new char[1000];

and without the delete[];

But is there any downside to doing like this ?

Thanks in advance
Best regards
Asger-P

On 12/27/2011 8:26 AM, Asger Joergensen wrote:
> I'm not that used to the stl so I ask to be on the safe side:
>
> typedef std::vector<char> TMembuf;
>
> TMembuf buf(1000);
> char* p =&buf[0];
>
> I have tested it and it seem to work fine just like:
>
> char* p = new char[1000];
>
> and without the delete[];
>
> But is there any downside to doing like this ?

Not really. Just remember that 'p' is not owned by you and that its
validity is tightly linked to the lifetime of 'buf'.

V
--
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

Hi Victor

Victor Bazarov wrote:

> On 12/27/2011 8:26 AM, Asger Joergensen wrote:
> > I'm not that used to the stl so I ask to be on the safe side:
> >
> >typedef std::vector<char> TMembuf;
> >
> > TMembuf buf(1000);
> > char* p =&buf[0];
> >
> > I have tested it and it seem to work fine just like:
> >
> > char* p = new char[1000];
> >
> > and without the delete[];
> >
> > But is there any downside to doing like this ?
>
> Not really. Just remember that 'p' is not owned by you and that its validity is
> tightly linked to the lifetime of 'buf'.

Thanks, and yes I know that I can only use p withing the scoope of buf.

Best regards
Asger-P

On Tue, 2011-12-27, Victor Bazarov wrote:
> On 12/27/2011 8:26 AM, Asger Joergensen wrote:
>> I'm not that used to the stl so I ask to be on the safe side:
>>
>> typedef std::vector<char> TMembuf;
>>
>> TMembuf buf(1000);
>> char* p =&buf[0];
>>
>> I have tested it and it seem to work fine just like:
>>
>> char* p = new char[1000];
>>
>> and without the delete[];
>>
>> But is there any downside to doing like this ?
>
> Not really. Just remember that 'p' is not owned by you and that its
> validity is tightly linked to the lifetime of 'buf'.

And to 'buf' not being resized, swapped etc. But it's fairly easy to
manage such things -- easier than to deal with new[] IMHO.

/Jorgen

--
// Jorgen Grahn <grahn@ Oo o. . .
\X/ snipabacken.se> O o .

On 12/27/2011 11:27 PM, XeCycle wrote:
> "Asger Joergensen"<> writes:
>
>> Hi
>
> Hello,
>
>> I'm not that used to the stl so I ask to be on the safe side:
>>
>> typedef std::vector<char> TMembuf;
>>
>> TMembuf buf(1000);
>> char* p =&buf[0];
>>
>> I have tested it and it seem to work fine just like:
>>
>> char* p = new char[1000];
>>
>> and without the delete[];
>>
>> But is there any downside to doing like this ?
>
> This is not recommended, of course. You didn't even use any of
> the vector facilities, in this case. Vectors provide the method
> reserve().

WHAT is not recommended? And why the hell not?

And what use would Asger have for 'reserve()'? std::vector has a proper
constructor that allocates the buffer and makes it ready to use.

> However if you want a buffer, there's circular buffer in boost
> library.

Asger needed something analogous to an array allocated by 'new[]'. A
standard vector is just about what the library can offer. Boost does
not exist on every platform, while std::vector does. There is no sense
in using a non-portable library when the Standard library suffices.

V
--
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask