Do all the things like ++ or -- rants, post your own rants, comment on others' rants and build your customized dev avatarSign Up
jaread2941yIt should work, probably - the memory layout of Model and ModelA (up to the first 4 or 8 bytes (the size of a pointer)) should be the same. A good idea? probably not.
@Lahsen2016 it's a example, actually it has more members.
lo98be7451yWell, there shouldn't be any problem
Unless you try to use "value" before re-initialization
And it could give bigger problems if ma was an array since ma is a pointer and so is m. ma+1 has a size and m a different one which means overwriting stuff over and over
It really isn't the best idea unless you really know what you're doing
I wouldn't feel comfortable with a bomb like that
gblues6971y"legal" is very loosely defined in C. This technique is basically a poor man's interface. The important thing is that the members have to be in the same order and the same types.
That's legalish (hey, I guess it works), but I think that falls into the category of "Don't ever do this in production." I'm not positive if that falls into the category of undefined behavior, but I wouldn't be shocked if cranking the optimizations up on the compiler broke that
lo98be7451yI just realized I didn't answer your question @cpp0xc0ffeeee
It's perfectly legal, meaning it compiles correctly
It won't work unless it's handled veery carefully
And it's also unlikely to crash, meaning it will probably disrupt a shit ton of data before being corrected
Avoid or refactor it, that's what I'd do
@Lahsen2016 do you explicitly search for "pointer" rants xD
Your Job Suck?
Take a quick quiz from Triplebyte to skip the job search hassles and jump to final interviews at hot tech firms
Get a Better Job