为什么不restrpret_cast编译? [英] Why doesn't this reinterpret_cast compile?
问题描述
我知道reinterpret_cast是危险的,我只是这样做来测试它。我有以下代码:
I understand that reinterpret_cast is dangerous, I'm just doing this to test it. I have the following code:
int x = 0;
double y = reinterpret_cast<double>(x);
当我试图编译程序时,它给我一个错误,说
When I try to compile the program, it gives me an error saying
invalid cast from type 'float' to type 'double
发生了什么事?我认为reinterpret_cast是流氓演员,你可以用来将苹果转换为潜艇,为什么不是这个简单的铸造编译?
What's going on? I thought reinterpret_cast was the rogue cast that you could use to convert apples to submarines, why won't this simple cast compile?
推荐答案
通过将y赋值给转换返回的值,您不会真正转换值 x
,您正在转换它。也就是说, y
没有指向 x
,并假装它指向一个浮点。转换构造类型 float
的新值,并从 x
分配值。有几种方法可以在C ++中进行这种转换,其中有:
By assigning y to the value returned by the cast you're not really casting the value x
, you're converting it. That is, y
doesn't point to x
and pretend that it points to a float. Conversion constructs a new value of type float
and assigns it the value from x
. There are several ways to do this conversion in C++, among them:
int main()
{
int x = 42;
float f = static_cast<float>(x);
float f2 = (float)x;
float f3 = float(x);
float f4 = x;
return 0;
}
唯一真正的区别是最后一个(隐式转换)编译器诊断在更高的警告级别。但是它们在功能上都是一样的 - 并且在很多情况下实际上是相同的东西,如同一个机器代码。
The only real difference being the last one (an implicit conversion) will generate a compiler diagnostic on higher warning levels. But they all do functionally the same thing -- and in many case actually the same thing, as in the same machine code.
现在if你真的想假装 x
是一个float,那么你真的想通过这样做来转换 x
:
Now if you really do want to pretend that x
is a float, then you really do want to cast x
, by doing this:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int x = 42;
float* pf = reinterpret_cast<float*>(&x);
(*pf)++;
cout << *pf;
return 0;
}
你可以看到这是多么危险。事实上,我在我的机器上运行这个输出是 1
,这绝对不是42 + 1。
You can see how dangerous this is. In fact, the output when I run this on my machine is 1
, which is decidedly not 42+1.
这篇关于为什么不restrpret_cast编译?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持IT屋!