Solved

When To Use static_cast as opposed to traditional methods

Posted on 1998-03-15
5
382 Views
Last Modified: 2008-02-01
C++ introduced the use of new casting operators.    In a book I am reading I have came across
static_cast as a way to convert types to other types.  Previously I would  use the following method of
casting.

while ((!isspace(pBuffer[location])) && ((unsigned int)location < strlen(pBuffer)))

Should I abandon the above method of casting for the static_cast method used
below.

while ((!isspace(pBuffer[location])) && (static_cast<unsigned int>(location) < strlen(pBuffer)))

What are the advantages of using static_cast as opposed to direct casting as
in the first line of code?  Are there any advantages to using the former casting method I was used to.

Thanks For The Input.
Darrell
0
Comment
Question by:larockd
  • 2
  • 2
5 Comments
 
LVL 3

Expert Comment

by:q2guo
ID: 1183503
static_cast has basically the same power and meaning as the general-purpose c-style cast.  If you are programming in C++
you should abandon the old style C cast.  Also, the new style
cast in C++ is easier to indentify.
0
 

Author Comment

by:larockd
ID: 1183504
I want to know what the advantages are.  Why did they create static_cast and abandoned the old casting style.  What are the benefits.  

As in my question I posed these questions which were not answered in your proposed answer
What are the advantages of using static_cast as opposed to direct casting as
in the first line of code?  Are there any advantages to using the former casting method I was used to.
0
 
LVL 3

Accepted Solution

by:
q2guo earned 10 total points
ID: 1183505
ok, static_cast is exactly the same as the old c style cast.  It was introduced in C++ along with three other types of casts.  These three other types of casts are very different from the old style cast.  

So, in your example using static_cast didn't give you any advantage except it is easier to spot than the c style.
0
 
LVL 22

Expert Comment

by:nietod
ID: 1183506
As q2quop said, the new static cast is FUNCTIONALLY identical to the old cast.  That is, it produces the same result.  However there is an important difference.  It stands out (it is ugly as sin.)  This can makes sure that people reading the code don't miss it by mistake.  The old cast just consists of a type name and parenthesis and in a complex expression can easily be missed.

In most cases, I prefer the old cast myself, unless it looks like it is going to get burried.
0
 

Author Comment

by:larockd
ID: 1183507
Thanks For the input..

0

Featured Post

Optimizing Cloud Backup for Low Bandwidth

With cloud storage prices going down a growing number of SMBs start to use it for backup storage. Unfortunately, business data volume rarely fits the average Internet speed. This article provides an overview of main Internet speed challenges and reveals backup best practices.

Question has a verified solution.

If you are experiencing a similar issue, please ask a related question

Suggested Solutions

When writing generic code, using template meta-programming techniques, it is sometimes useful to know if a type is convertible to another type. A good example of when this might be is if you are writing diagnostic instrumentation for code to generat…
Many modern programming languages support the concept of a property -- a class member that combines characteristics of both a data member and a method.  These are sometimes called "smart fields" because you can add logic that is applied automaticall…
The viewer will learn how to pass data into a function in C++. This is one step further in using functions. Instead of only printing text onto the console, the function will be able to perform calculations with argumentents given by the user.
The viewer will learn how to clear a vector as well as how to detect empty vectors in C++.

810 members asked questions and received personalized solutions in the past 7 days.

Join the community of 500,000 technology professionals and ask your questions.

Join & Ask a Question