Related questions

why int a= 4i; not report an syntax error(c++)

2017-06-17 18:49 Peng Zuo imported from Stackoverflow

enter image description here 

#include <iostream>
using namespace std;

int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) {
    int a = 232u;
    int b = 4i;
    cout << a << endl << b;
}

I was review basic of cpp, As the screen shot I took, I tried to sign an unsigned int to a int which was fine, then I tried change that u to i and waiting for a error, but there's no error and output was 0. There's no define of i. So what happened.

I'm using xcode on mac, last picture is the build settings.

2 answers

  • answered 2017-06-17 18:49 Stargateur

    C++ has a concept of literals, this is used to describe the type of a value. For example, integer literal can be used to write I want a integer 1 with a type unsigned int. We will write it 1u.

    In your case, your are probably using a GNU extension for imaginary constants. What you write don't compile in C++ standard.

    The good way to use complex literal in C++ standard is to include include <complex>. And to use std::complex_literals, this is only possible in C++14.

  • answered 2017-06-17 18:49 Stephan Lechner

    The suffix i denotes the imaginary part of a complex number; when assigning an (implicitly) constructed complex number to integral value, only the real part is taken.

    Hence, the following expression yields 0: 

    int b = 4i;  // gives 0; real-part of 4i is 0, imaginary-part is 4: casting to int gives the real part, i.e. 0

    But:

    int x = 4i*4i; // gives -16; as i means the square root of -1, i*i yields -1; so 4i*4i = -16

    Note that this works even without including <complex>.

See also questions close to this topic

  • Program glitches after receiving an variable different than an integer in C++

    I made a program that loops forever and the user has to first input a character, then an integer. However, when the user inputs something different than an integer the program glitches and starts to print madly the strings "C: " and "N: ". What can i do to solve that glitch? 

    #include <iostream>
using namespace std;
char carac;
int num;
int main()
{
    for(;;)
    {
        cout << "C: ";
        cin >> carac;
        cout << "N: ";
        cin >> num;
    }
    return 0;
}
  • c++ emplace_back with nested objects optimization

    I was slightly confused about behavior of emplace_back. Let's have a look.

    struct innerObject
{
    innerObject(int );
};

class outterObject
{
    innerObject member;
public:
    outterObject(innerObject member);
};

int main()
{
    std::vector<outterObject> v1;
    v1.emplace_back(5);
}

    So in this case we could pass integer and it works.

    What about constructor if innerObject needed two ints to construct from instead of just one? Neither v1.emplace_back(5,5) nor v1.emplace_back({5,5}) nor any other combination which I tried works. Is it somehow possible? Is there any better option to make such things? (optimized)

  • C++ standard paragraph about member template specialization of unspecialized template

    In the current draft of the C++ standard, the paragraph [temp.expl.spec]p.18 says:

    A specialization of a member function template, member class template, or static data member template of a non-specialized class template is itself a template.

    However, the above paragraph temp.expl.spec]p.17 states (my emphasis):

    In an explicit specialization declaration for a member of a class template or a member template that appears in namespace scope, the member template and some of its enclosing class templates may remain unspecialized, except that the declaration shall not explicitly specialize a class member template if its enclosing class templates are not explicitly specialized as well. [...]

    Therefore, it should be impossible to explicitly specialize a member template without specializing its enclosing class template, so [temp.expl.spec]p.18 is wrong. I highlighted the word explicitly because [temp.expl.spec]p.18 says "A specialization [...]". Specialization can have a lot of meanings, one of which could be explicit specialization.

    I checked and [temp.expl.spec]p.18 appeared in the standard before [temp.expl.spec]p.17. For example, in the 1996 version of the standard [temp.expl.spec]p.18 is present while [temp.expl.spec]p.17 is not.

    What is the original intended meaning of [temp.expl.spec]p.18?

    Thank you.