you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 64 points 5 months ago (14 children)

Wait. It’s been a long time but shouldn’t be int*** -> int** -> int* -> int ?

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 78 points 5 months ago (10 children)

    I think int*** is meant to be pointing at int**, but the image is just unclear about where everything is in perspective.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 5 months ago (8 children)

    Pretty sure the image is clear:

    int*** -> int*
    int** -> int
    Int* -> int
    

    Clarity doesn’t mean correct. But that’s probably why it’s posted here. 🤷‍♂️

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 8 points 5 months ago

    int** is inside a TV, and persumably int* must be inside another TV(even though uts not edited in). The image perespective is showing one thing inside the other, inside the other. So when when int*** points the TV it reference int**, which reference int* which reference int. Its just edited very bad

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 5 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 4 points 5 months ago* (3 children)

    It’s to check to see if commenters know how to escape the symbol. Congratulations! You passed!

    Source: I made it up.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 3 points 5 months ago

    That's not the end of the chain either, right?

    Because : int -> &int -> &&int

    Or can you not use the address operator like that? It also might be int& &, I failed cs2200 on this exact type of technicality

  • source
  • parent