Why in C++ passing a pointer is not termed as a parameter passing technique.....Is it because it has a flaw of some kind i.e. address is not reflected back/we can change the address in called function..is that so...if that's the reason....then we can pass it as const pointer as a remedy.....
Actually i am not sure that...changing address is flaw...
plz comment
Jump to Postit is. passing a pointer is no different to passing anything else. Its a parameter the same as any other.
it is. passing a pointer is no different to passing anything else. Its a parameter the same as any other.
It is indeed a parameter passing technique -- there are only two ways to pass something, by value and by reference. Pass by reference can be done in one of two ways -- a pointer (C) or reference operator (C++). The three differences I can think of
1. use of dot or pointer operators within the receiving function
void foo(int* n)
{
*n = 0;
}
void foo(int& n)
{
n = 0;
}2. use of '&' operator inside the passing function
int main()
{
int n;
foo(&n);
foo(n);
return 0;
}3. They can be overloaded functions as shown in the examples above.
Otherwise, the dot and pointer operator compile down to the same identical code. Its all really just a matter of programmer preference.
We're a friendly, industry-focused community of developers, IT pros, digital marketers, and technology enthusiasts meeting, networking, learning, and sharing knowledge.