Hi Everyone,

I had the following declaration and i expected the compiler to give
an error, but it didn't, how does it interpret the declaration?

const * int ptr;

Thanks in advance!!!

Rahul wrote:
> I had the following declaration and i expected the compiler to give
> an error, but it didn't, how does it interpret the declaration?
>
> const * int ptr;

You should probably ask the compiler or its developers. The '*'
symbol cannot be followed by 'int'. Could be a bug in the compiler.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

Victor Bazarov wrote:
> The '*' symbol cannot be followed by 'int'.

result = a * int (b);

Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Victor Bazarov wrote:
>> The '*' symbol cannot be followed by 'int'.
>
> result = a * int (b);

What compiler does that? GCC 4.2 rejects both of these:

int main() { const * int ptr; }
int main() { void* ptr = 0; const * int ptr; }

Both cases cause the same diagnostic:

g++ -ansi -pedantic -Wall main.cc -o main
main.cc: In function 'int main()':
main.cc:1: error: expected unqualified-id before 'int'
main.cc:1: error: expected initializer before 'int'

Juha Nieminen wrote:
> Victor Bazarov wrote:
>> The '*' symbol cannot be followed by 'int'.
>
> result = a * int (b);
>
>

I meant in a declaration. See subj.

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask

Jeff Schwab wrote:
> Juha Nieminen wrote:
>> Victor Bazarov wrote:
>>> The '*' symbol cannot be followed by 'int'.
>>
>> result = a * int (b);
>
> What compiler does that? GCC 4.2 rejects both of these:
>
> int main() { const * int ptr; }
> int main() { void* ptr = 0; const * int ptr; }
>
> Both cases cause the same diagnostic:
>
> g++ -ansi -pedantic -Wall main.cc -o main
> main.cc: In function 'int main()':
> main.cc:1: error: expected unqualified-id before 'int'
> main.cc:1: error: expected initializer before 'int'

I should have mentioned that trying to assign "a * int b" produces a
similar diagnostic: "expected primary-expression before 'int'".

On Feb 22, 1:22am, Jeff Schwab <j...@schwabcenter.com> wrote:
> Jeff Schwab wrote:
> > Juha Nieminen wrote:
> >> Victor Bazarov wrote:
> >>> The '*' symbol cannot be followed by 'int'.
>
> >> result = a * int (b);
>
> > What compiler does that? GCC 4.2 rejects both of these:
>
> > int main() { const * int ptr; }
> > int main() { void* ptr = 0; const * int ptr; }
>
> > Both cases cause the same diagnostic:
>
> > g++ -ansi -pedantic -Wall main.cc -o main
> > main.cc: In function 'int main()':
> > main.cc:1: error: expected unqualified-id before 'int'
> > main.cc:1: error: expected initializer before 'int'
>
> I should have mentioned that trying to assign "a * int b" produces a
> similar diagnostic: "expected primary-expression before 'int'".

you`ve missed the braces around 'b'.

regards,
FM.

terminator wrote:
> On Feb 22, 1:22 am, Jeff Schwab <j...@schwabcenter.com> wrote:
>> Jeff Schwab wrote:
>>> Juha Nieminen wrote:
>>>> Victor Bazarov wrote:
>>>>> The '*' symbol cannot be followed by 'int'.
>>>> result = a * int (b);
>>> What compiler does that? GCC 4.2 rejects both of these:
>>> int main() { const * int ptr; }
>>> int main() { void* ptr = 0; const * int ptr; }
>>> Both cases cause the same diagnostic:
>>> g++ -ansi -pedantic -Wall main.cc -o main
>>> main.cc: In function 'int main()':
>>> main.cc:1: error: expected unqualified-id before 'int'
>>> main.cc:1: error: expected initializer before 'int'
>> I should have mentioned that trying to assign "a * int b" produces a
>> similar diagnostic: "expected primary-expression before 'int'".
>
> you`ve missed the braces around 'b'.

Yes, I know. That's the point.

Juha snipped the part that would have made that clear, and I did not put
it back. Please see the original post in this thread.