Gregor@gregtech.eu to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 months agoC memegregtech.euexternal-linkmessage-square18fedilinkarrow-up1217arrow-down118file-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
arrow-up1199arrow-down1external-linkC memegregtech.euGregor@gregtech.eu to Programmer Humor@programming.dev · 3 months agomessage-square18fedilinkfile-textcross-posted to: [email protected]
minus-squareSpaceNoodle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up25·3 months agoThis is why I only allocate on the stack
minus-squarexmunk@sh.itjust.workslinkfedilinkarrow-up20arrow-down1·3 months agoPeople who are enthusiastic about using pointers in C++ are doing it wrong. Never use a pointer when you can get away with a reference.
minus-squareKindaABigDyl@programming.devlinkfedilinkarrow-up23·3 months agoFor C++, yes. But “reference” is just a way of using the pointer when it comes to C
minus-squareSpaceNoodle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up8·3 months agoSure, but that’s technically allocation-agnostic either way.
minus-squareSpaceNoodle@lemmy.worldlinkfedilinkarrow-up9·3 months agoThis guy gets it Static allocation for the SIL ratings
minus-squaremagic_lobster_party@kbin.runlinkfedilinkarrow-up12·3 months agoStack overflow intensifies
This is why I only allocate on the stack
People who are enthusiastic about using pointers in C++ are doing it wrong. Never use a pointer when you can get away with a reference.
For C++, yes. But “reference” is just a way of using the pointer when it comes to C
Sure, but that’s technically allocation-agnostic either way.
Based nasa compliant engineer
This guy gets it
Static allocation for the SIL ratings
Stack overflow intensifies
I only use the registers.