• C

Passing var to a charpointer with the & prefix

In C (not C++)

If I have a string field within a structure e.g.
char name[35];

and i havea function that takes a charpointer e.g.
void clean_string(char *buff)

Are the following two calls the same (i.e. wil they both work):
clean_string(customer.name);
clean_string(&customer.name);

I have stumbled upon some previously written C code that uses BOTH ways of calling this function and need to know if I have to fix the calls that pass the &customer_name.

Thanks.
LVL 4
Stephen KairysTechnical Writer - ConsultantAsked:
Who is Participating?
 
Infinity08Commented:
>> Are the following two calls the same (i.e. wil they both work):
>> clean_string(customer.name);
>> clean_string(&customer.name);

Yes. Both will work. The first is more accurate though.
0
 
Stephen KairysTechnical Writer - ConsultantAuthor Commented:
>>Yes. Both will work. The first is more accurate though.

And by "accurate" you mean.....?
Tks
0
 
Infinity08Commented:
customer.name has the type char [35], and it transparently reverts to a pointer to the first char in the array (ie. a char*) in a context where a char* is expected, like in :

>> clean_string(customer.name);

Taking the address of customer.name though gets you the address of the entire array (ie. a char (*) [35]). The reason it will work, is because the address of the array is the same as the address of the first item in the array. It's just less accurate because of the type confusion.

None of the compilers I know have a problem with either way though.


Note that &(customer.name[0]) is also accurate, and gives the same as the first option above.
0
The IT Degree for Career Advancement

Earn your B.S. in Network Operations and Security and become a network and IT security expert. This WGU degree program curriculum was designed with tech-savvy, self-motivated students in mind – allowing you to use your technical expertise, to address real-world business problems.

 
Stephen KairysTechnical Writer - ConsultantAuthor Commented:
OK Thanks. I'm leaving that code as is. I'm not aware of any reported problems with it so if it ain't broke... :)

Tks again.
0
 
Infinity08Commented:
No need to fix it, no.

Just be aware of the distinction. It can still come back and bite you, when (for some reason) customer.name is changed to be a char* instead of an array of char. When that happens, the second case (using &customer.name) will not work any more.
0
 
Stephen KairysTechnical Writer - ConsultantAuthor Commented:
Thanks for the clarification. That's good info to have.
0
Question has a verified solution.

Are you are experiencing a similar issue? Get a personalized answer when you ask a related question.

Have a better answer? Share it in a comment.

All Courses

From novice to tech pro — start learning today.