Hello everyone! I've been doing some mix and match with my content style lately. Just trying new things. Let me know what you think :) To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/Mults You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
Not a regular viewer (yet), but - This right here is literally a master piece for me. Educational, something interesting, memes (not to in you'r face / loud audio - still prominent to be entertaining), relatability, the ever growing crazieness, straight to the point, not to short nor to long, right volume for music and mic, the outro song - all just perfect. Keep it up!
it's in a funny YT video because the concept--spiral rule--was documented before the youtuber was born and is prolific amongst anyone who has made efforts to properly understand C
@@garfield1964 Yes, definitely. It's just that most [modern] beginner C books and tutorials skip this, even though it's essential. I was actually introduced to the spiral rule by this video and it blows my mind how not widespread it is, given its simplicity.
@@jrstf Per default, member functions are just statically compiled into the calling code. But it is true for virtual functions. They are referenced in the vtable, which exists for each type with virtual functions. Each of these objects then has an internal pointer to its respective vtable, which contains the pointers to the implementation defined procedures. This is how dynamic polymorphism is implemented.
It all can get stupidly complicated as we've seen, but the syntax follows simple rules: 1. start reading from the identifier out 2. favor [ ] and ( ) over * int (*(*x)[ ]) ( ): - Following rule #1, we start at x x - The identifier x is alone in parentheses with an asterisk, so it is [§1] a pointer *x - Outside of the parentheses, we follow rule #2, so it is [§2] an array (*x)[ ] - We're left with an asterisk inside the parentheses, so [§3] pointers *(*x)[ ] - Outside of the parentheses, rule #2, [§4] functions (*(*x)[ ])( ) - The functions return [§5] int putting §1, §2, §3, §4 and §5 together: x is (§1) a pointer to (§2) an array of (§3) pointers to (§4) functions that return (§5) an integer Once you got the hang of it, you can rewrite the example like: * [ ] * ( ) -> int And stitch things together in a way that makes sense. "->" means "returns" and it's optional/redundant (anything immediately after parentheses in this notation is a return anyway) Take the example of 5:34: [ ] * * (* char, * (* char) -> * int) -> [ ] * (* * char, * ( ) -> * char) -> * int Array of pointers to a pointer to a function that takes (a pointer to a character and a pointer to a function that takes (a pointer to a character) and returns a pointer to an integer) and returns an array of pointers to a function that takes (a pointer to a pointer to a character and a pointer to a function that returns a pointer to a character) and returns a pointer to an integer It looks insane, but it's not that difficult to wrap your head around if you're writing it following those two simple rules
bro i was with you util i expanded ur explanation... after expanding it i sad( i aint reading all this sheet lol) , but hey, great that u can explain this
Small tip for 1:20, you can order malloc like you did just by manually asking for each memory "sizeof(char) * 6..." but if you make a tipedef of your struct, you can just ask for a "sizeof(FUCKER)" and it will do the same, but far easier to read, and simpler
Seems correct. However, getting to return the integer by calling those functions seems a different story. I guess it be something like this: (*x)[2]();
A class that someone parameterised the hell out of, it's like "okay, let x point to containers upon containers of functions (class) that parse strings... but in a waythat is so parametrised and specific that you need to parse other string in your chosen function and based on result of parsing you get the answer of your call of x... ...the anser being a f***ing array ofpointers to functions! So basically the class that is x is not all - you now use this class to hold the answers of called(/callable) functions and use THEM as your ACTUAL functions that themselves take an array of strings and parse those strings collection based on (presumably, because it doesn't make much sense otherwise) the original character that is returned from chosen constexpr function (due to no parameters)... ...and all that returns an adress of where the value of it is stored, YOU KNOW, LIKE IT'S TOTALLY NORMAL.
3:24 funnily enough this is how dynamic dispatch works in c++, each class (implicitly) creates a pointer to a global array of function pointers. This is also known as a virtual table or vtable/vftable as it contains the list of "virtual" functions for that class.
A programmer goes to therapy. Therapist: Please tell me what you are scared of. Programmer: I am scared of pointers. Therapist: Okay, let me give you an array of pointers to handle them. Programmer: 😱😱😱
"For example, if I use this struct 'Fucker'" caught me completely off guard XD My main takeaway from this video though is that as a C# dev for Unity, I shouldn't touch C++ with a 5 foot pole or else risk entering pointer hell.
@@vibaj16 tbf, I was being slightly hyperbolic. I do want to get round to learning C++ eventually but the combination of pointers, header files, garbage collection, and syntax is just a lot.
@@vibaj16 It's really simple.... The library will only use (void* buf, size_t n) for ALL types. C believes that smart users know that the void* returned by the function is a specific type among the 100+ custom types, it will be a linklist + table with a specific internal mix of pointers to stack and pointers to allocated heap, and then you have to be careful about pointer casts, linklist iteration, use void* to calculate offsets, of course you will remember which one is CHAR8* string and which is CHAR16* string, finally free the heap allocation and perfectly avoid the pointer to the stack. The biggest advantage of C is that it is suitable for keeping your job.
It's really simple.... The library will only use (void* buf, size_t n) for ALL custom types. It is linklist + table with a specific internal mix of pointers to stack and pointers to allocated heap, CHAR8* string and which is CHAR16* string.
Imagine programming in a language where you can actually specify the type of a value (i32) rather than some kind of a suggestion which varies in meaning in every implementation and even with platform specific switches on the command line.
This video is amazing, now I can play that game with my friends: Team A: Take a shot every time he doesn't say "pointer" Team B: Take 3 shots every two times he says "pointer" Let's see who wins 💪
In older computers, especially Lisp machines, pointers always came with a size. A pointer was a 2-D object to the hardware. It had a location, and a size. The weirdness of C/C++ pointer types is an attempt to recapture some of the elegance of earlier hardware in a later era where the hardware forgot about data safety.
Location + size pointers are referred to as "wide pointers" in modern C++, AFAIK. You're right though -- C's syntax is a desperate attempt to make the size portion of a wide pointer into a compile-time issue rather than a run-time issue, mostly for performance reasons.
I finally understood. The type signatures are provided not the obvious way around, but outside in. For example: int x() is a function named "x", returning an integer. But instead of "x", I can put something different and it will mean, put the whole function inside whatever is in that position. For example "int (*x)()" means to put the function inside the *x. So It's a pointer to a function. But it's not just functions, it's **everything** if we analyze the "int (*x)()" again we get: int , which means to put the integer inside something that something: () It's a function! which means, that we put our int iside the return paramater of that function what's something: * it's a pointer! which means, we put our whole function with integer return type into a pointer. that something: x It's a name "x" which means, we put our whole pointer to a function with a return type of integer into the name "x" Let's do another example: char *(*(*(**x[])())[])(); it's a char, which is in a pointer, which is in the return type of a function, which is in a pointer which is in an array which is in a pointer, which is in the return type of a function, which is in a pointer, which is in a pointer, which is in an array, which is in "x"
Nah I mean if you understand it then great, but nah Its name first, then sufix left-to-right, then prefix right-to-left, with () being the sufix function arguments operator. I best understand it same as the compiler, start from the inside and go out, sufix prefix exit-braket. Its doesnt matter here, yes, but this also reminds you how other operators work like array access and dereference operators. *x[8] means "take the 8th member of x and dereference", where as (*x)[8] means "dereference x and take the 8th member of that"
5:31 and at this point I soundly fell asleep and had a very restful night in dreamland, not worrying about pointers to pointers or functions calling pointers or anything returning an int again...
thank you I was confused by pointers and wasn't sure I should get back to trying to learn C but your video made me stop questioning myself and convinced me to abandon the idea of getting back to it for good. like
You know what's funny, I've been programming in C for 15 years and I was confused at he first one. But after you broke it down I understood it perfectly. I could even see situations where it would be quite useful to know. Great video, hope you're enjoying learning computer science. I still am
As hairy and convoluted as the examples got, you did a fantastic job of breaking them down. I’ve spent most of my time coding in python and Java, so have thankfully never had to use pointers in practice. I do, however, remember the outright confusion experienced during a college C++ class…
Why: If you're a postman in a small town and they ask you to "deliver this package to that weird yellow house", you'll figure out where to deliver what in a reasonable amount of time. But if you need to deliver a massive amount of packages, that are all stored in different places inside a big warehouse, to a couple of skyscrapers with multiple delivery points per floor, you'll have a much easier time if the exact address is provided.
Thanks for the colors that help in pointing what you're pointing at so that your point can go straight to the point of my eyes and gets deleted any way which I point out that there's no point in this. There are some qwerty typists out there who like to type the word "point".
Entertaining and very educational for me. Seeing different uses of pointers that you tried to demonstrate and describe them made my me intrigue, but at the same time dizzy. 😂
To be honest, even though university tests your knowledge of things sometimes the examples are so obscure that instead of writing what is this I would just write "Change the implementation because it will absolutely never go through any code review"
Im not even going to lie. This video did more for me than any amount of researching and googling. Believe it or not, i actually learned how to read pointer syntax from this cluster fuck of a video.
...how the fuc did this actually help me understand pointers. For some reason I've been reading c++ order of operations(programming has a word for it i dunno it's 3am) from left to right thinking whatever is on the leftmost side (so often a basic type declaration like void, int e.t.c) was the first important thing and ive just been subconsciously remembering to prioritise asteriskt and parenthesis for, who knows why reasons, but if you just loop out from the variable/object/parameter/satan/x, remembering to prioritise the right side (functions or arrays(/square-brackets) before the left side, normal parenthesis firstforemost, then it goes in a back and forth in a repeatable pattern. I will guarantee you that I'll have forgotten this by tomorrow when I wake up but cool video man. 10/10 would "asmr to study to" again
you shoud have mentioned operator precedence. and also thr syntax related to those concepts perfectly fit into english grammar. as a Türk, ı can say it in english (up to some point) but cannot think of its meaning because we build up the noun phrases other way around
The way i look at it is, the way you declare a pointer, is the way you access it. So if you got int *(*p[]), you'd access the innermost value (being the int) in the same way: *(*p[i]). And then you work your way backwards To make the point(er) clearer ill go through this. So you access the int by doing *(*p[]), so *p[] is an array of pointers to int, and *p points to an array of pointers to int, and p is a pointer to an array of pointers to int
Once you pause the video at 5:34 for 10 minutes you will finally be able to crack it as you know the symbols are *,(),[], are a ""function"" call in your head return the words from your mouth pointer, function, array,etc... But the the thing i still don't get is why you need a pointer to a pointer? Is it useful. If yes then how?
3:29 --> See line 15 (3:21) for further clarification. In short, line 25 is saying that you want to first dereference the pointer, followed by selecting the function at index 0 for that pointer; then you have to de-reference that index (the array itself decays to a pointer containing the addresses of each function) in order to call the function you want from that double pointer. i.e., createFunctionPointerArray() returns "& -> {&add, &subtract}". You're making an embedded function library, I guess you could say, that the variable references, and you have to dereference all those pointers to access the function you want. Easy to understand?
There's probably already been someone saying this, but at 1:09, the allocation for the FUCKER variable was technically not correct, since alignment could see the struct end up larger than the raw data it contains. For instance, if we used an int after the char[6], most compilers would add a 2-byte padding before it to ensure that the address of the int is divisible by 4 (size of a 32 bit int which I assume is what int is) In general, the safest option is to always use malloc(sizeof()); it'll give you the correct size the compiler will assign your structs
A pointer consists of: 7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 12. I.e. 7 bits unused, 12 bits for the physical offset in memory and the 9's are offsets into a page "tree" if you will . Most CPU's today only use four-level pages, so the top 16 bits (instead of 7) are unused - but Intel is starting to use five-level pages too. It's also why pages are 2^12 (4096) in size, and why large pages can be 2MB (2^(12+9)) and 1GB (2^(12+9+9)) respectively. You can cast a pointer to a number, and shift the bits into different values to clearly see how there's a clear pattern when you allocate memory etc.
im new to the concept of pointers and memory allocation, since i just started learning c++ a few days ago. decided to spend an hour or so looking at this after learning the basics of pointers until i feel like i understood enough about how it all ties together, i guess i learned more about it but now i have a painful headache...
Understanding pointers, is like the Great Barrier between amateur devs and the pros! Because THIS is a concept in which knowing how computers actually works, helps tremendously!
Pointers are like your fingers, fingers that are pointing at something (aliased "x"), that object "x" is stored in an area known as the memory address A pointer holds the memory address containing variable "x" To obtain the value located in the memory address of variable x pointed by the pointer, use `&ptr` Now, a pointer to a pointer holds the memory address containing the original pointer object pointing to variable "x" above Repeat to keep getting the memory address of everything the previous level is pointing
also all this pointer magic can be neatly swept under the rug if you use a lot of typedefs with proper names, makes the code much easier to understand for everyone
Well, obviously when you need an array of pointers to pointers to functions that receive "a pointer to a character; and a pointer to a function that receives a pointer to a character and returns a pointer to an int" and returns a pointer to an array of pointers to functions that receive "a pointer to a pointer of characters, and a pointer to a function that returns a pointer to a character" as arguments, and return a pointer to an integer
I'm assuming the brackets that aren't used or don't have anything in them are just placeholders for new nested variables and code to be added in the future?... Either that or code that already exists with those brackets in mind and are connected to similar code.
He is using the debugging features. Install the c extensions on vscode and look about how to use gdb debugging. Its a bit of a rabbit hole depending on the project.
Everytime I paused and I am shocked how i get it before you start telling how to understand it. Maybe because i have been doing reverse engineering and malware stuff for long time now. Those codes actually have hell of typecasting with different data types and sizes. But greater video !!! ❤
I'm getting a new computer soon and I'm absolutely going to make stupid and dangerous C programs with this knowledge now. Last time, I managed to make a program that randomly crashes x11
Hello everyone! I've been doing some mix and match with my content style lately. Just trying new things. Let me know what you think :)
To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/Mults
You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.
Not a regular viewer (yet), but -
This right here is literally a master piece for me. Educational, something interesting, memes (not to in you'r face / loud audio - still prominent to be entertaining), relatability, the ever growing crazieness, straight to the point, not to short nor to long, right volume for music and mic, the outro song - all just perfect. Keep it up!
I recognize that digimon cybersleuth ost
You escaped pointer hell with that add 😅
Subscribed🫡
btw, anyone know what's font used in the video? looks pretty nice
"say pointer again"
"fuck you"
is that rick and morty
@@user-qr4jf4tv2x yes
damn how did i read it in rick and morty voice in my head 😆
@@user-qr4jf4tv2x indeed it is
Did you just... insult me with a **pointer**? Son of a..
If a codebase has any of this stuff, you'll know it's been backdoored.
lol exactly. this is extreme obfuscation
@@atomgutan8064Some Jia Tan shit
@@tuhkiscgibin6627 lmao this is the new backdoor reference now ig
Once committed, always committed. No explanation is needed. It works.
Well, the person who backdoored it understood it, so jokes on you :P
You realize how complicated pointer syntax is when the best explanation of how to read complex statements is in a funny YT video
Well, nobody writes them in the first place. That's why `typedef` exists.
it's in a funny YT video because the concept--spiral rule--was documented before the youtuber was born and is prolific amongst anyone who has made efforts to properly understand C
@@garfield1964 Yes, definitely. It's just that most [modern] beginner C books and tutorials skip this, even though it's essential. I was actually introduced to the spiral rule by this video and it blows my mind how not widespread it is, given its simplicity.
I honestly never had any issues understanding basic and more advanced pointer stuff, but THIS is some actual good stuff LMAO great video
12 years old me learning C++ : "Ok so, its a box containing... a box, ok?, containing a box... fuck it"
Bring me that stuff which you are smoking
I got almost all of them in under 20 seconds, except the last one, I didn't even try to get it because at that point what are you doing
Who the hell would write the last one, without questioning their lives decisions.
…people making youtube videos?
who the fuck would use *
@@Elias01056 i am
@@danilbutygin238 why?
@@Elias01056 long-term habit
Aight I'm never listening to the word "pointer" again
"pointer"
You can read it instead. You're welcome
I point on her... Wait
learn about references!
Let me give you a few pointers about how to get over this issue
I'd like your comment, but it's at 911 and I can't ruin that
Honestly,
An array of functions sounds pretty dope.
Nevermind, an array of pointers to functions sounds pretty dope.
ain't that the same? or are we saying "an array of pointers to function pointers" (effectively double-indirection) in the second one?
Well, you can't have arrays of functions in the first place
Only pointers to functions
In C, you actually cannot store functions inside arrays anyway, the compiler will silently convert that code into a pointer to that function instead.
Is not every C++ member function referenced through an array of pointers to functions?
@@jrstf Per default, member functions are just statically compiled into the calling code. But it is true for virtual functions. They are referenced in the vtable, which exists for each type with virtual functions. Each of these objects then has an internal pointer to its respective vtable, which contains the pointers to the implementation defined procedures. This is how dynamic polymorphism is implemented.
to whoever reached a point in life where you ended up here or doing this, i really hope you find inner peace one day...
A Pointer in life
@@kyumullo ba dum tss.
It all can get stupidly complicated as we've seen, but the syntax follows simple rules:
1. start reading from the identifier out
2. favor [ ] and ( ) over *
int (*(*x)[ ]) ( ):
- Following rule #1, we start at x
x
- The identifier x is alone in parentheses with an asterisk, so it is [§1] a pointer
*x
- Outside of the parentheses, we follow rule #2, so it is [§2] an array
(*x)[ ]
- We're left with an asterisk inside the parentheses, so [§3] pointers
*(*x)[ ]
- Outside of the parentheses, rule #2, [§4] functions
(*(*x)[ ])( )
- The functions return [§5] int
putting §1, §2, §3, §4 and §5 together:
x is (§1) a pointer to (§2) an array of (§3) pointers to (§4) functions that return (§5) an integer
Once you got the hang of it, you can rewrite the example like:
* [ ] * ( ) -> int
And stitch things together in a way that makes sense. "->" means "returns" and it's optional/redundant (anything immediately after parentheses in this notation is a return anyway)
Take the example of 5:34:
[ ] * * (* char, * (* char) -> * int) -> [ ] * (* * char, * ( ) -> * char) -> * int
Array of pointers to a pointer to a function that takes (a pointer to a character and a pointer to a function that takes (a pointer to a character) and returns a pointer to an integer) and returns an array of pointers to a function that takes (a pointer to a pointer to a character and a pointer to a function that returns a pointer to a character) and returns a pointer to an integer
It looks insane, but it's not that difficult to wrap your head around if you're writing it following those two simple rules
bro i was with you util i expanded ur explanation... after expanding it i sad( i aint reading all this sheet lol) , but hey, great that u can explain this
@@nexushare8105 maybe there's a way to be more concise but then that's me who can't bother xD
My man, using asterisks here for anything but pointers is fucking evil, was there really no other way?
@@lightlezs7048 hahahaha good point, I'm gonna change that
@@lightlezs7048 better?
Small tip for 1:20, you can order malloc like you did just by manually asking for each memory "sizeof(char) * 6..." but if you make a tipedef of your struct, you can just ask for a "sizeof(FUCKER)" and it will do the same, but far easier to read, and simpler
im actually glad i found this video, you explained this well and now i know how to interpret those long lines
this is what I understood from 3:10
- arr[0] -> func1 => int1
- arr [1] -> func2 => int2
x ->arr - arr[2] -> func3 => int3
- arr[3] -> func4 => int4
- arr[4] -> func5 => int5
Seems correct. However, getting to return the integer by calling those functions seems a different story. I guess it be something like this:
(*x)[2]();
6:00 Bro is holding the entire class inside his variable definition
The God Variable.
A class that someone parameterised the hell out of, it's like "okay, let x point to containers upon containers of functions (class) that parse strings... but in a waythat is so parametrised and specific that you need to parse other string in your chosen function and based on result of parsing you get the answer of your call of x...
...the anser being a f***ing array ofpointers to functions! So basically the class that is x is not all - you now use this class to hold the answers of called(/callable) functions and use THEM as your ACTUAL functions that themselves take an array of strings and parse those strings collection based on (presumably, because it doesn't make much sense otherwise) the original character that is returned from chosen constexpr function (due to no parameters)...
...and all that returns an adress of where the value of it is stored, YOU KNOW, LIKE IT'S TOTALLY NORMAL.
3:24 funnily enough this is how dynamic dispatch works in c++, each class (implicitly) creates a pointer to a global array of function pointers. This is also known as a virtual table or vtable/vftable as it contains the list of "virtual" functions for that class.
A programmer goes to therapy.
Therapist: Please tell me what you are scared of.
Programmer: I am scared of pointers.
Therapist: Okay, let me give you an array of pointers to handle them.
Programmer: 😱😱😱
The worst part is the therapist passes by reference.
"For example, if I use this struct 'Fucker'" caught me completely off guard XD
My main takeaway from this video though is that as a C# dev for Unity, I shouldn't touch C++ with a 5 foot pole or else risk entering pointer hell.
no one actually uses crazy pointer stuff like this. Actually useful pointer stuff is simple and often feels quite elegant.
random swearing is peak reddit humour
@@vibaj16 tbf, I was being slightly hyperbolic. I do want to get round to learning C++ eventually but the combination of pointers, header files, garbage collection, and syntax is just a lot.
@@vibaj16 It's really simple.... The library will only use (void* buf, size_t n) for ALL types. C believes that smart users know that the void* returned by the function is a specific type among the 100+ custom types, it will be a linklist + table with a specific internal mix of pointers to stack and pointers to allocated heap, and then you have to be careful about pointer casts, linklist iteration, use void* to calculate offsets, of course you will remember which one is CHAR8* string and which is CHAR16* string, finally free the heap allocation and perfectly avoid the pointer to the stack.
The biggest advantage of C is that it is suitable for keeping your job.
It's really simple.... The library will only use (void* buf, size_t n) for ALL custom types. It is linklist + table with a specific internal mix of pointers to stack and pointers to allocated heap, CHAR8* string and which is CHAR16* string.
Man, It felt awesome and confusing at the same time, but thanks to you I come to know the different use of pointers.
function pointers are cool. But everything after it? only for the insane.
I think, most of the confusion comes from the syntax.
For example, int (*(*x)[])()
in Rust, would be Box>
"Box" is Rust's pointer
i32 is Rust's int
If I understood it correctly, that's a pointer to a vector of pointers to functions that return an int, right?
yes, it's just a lot of angle brackets, in a way that actually makes sense
C works the other way around
Your outermost Box is unnecessary indirection as the Vec already places the memory on the heap.
@@shanesnover4048 that's true, but not relevant
Imagine programming in a language where you can actually specify the type of a value (i32) rather than some kind of a suggestion which varies in meaning in every implementation and even with platform specific switches on the command line.
00:07 "So what is this?" "Obviously A NIGHTMARE."
This video is amazing, now I can play that game with my friends:
Team A: Take a shot every time he doesn't say "pointer"
Team B: Take 3 shots every two times he says "pointer"
Let's see who wins 💪
In older computers, especially Lisp machines, pointers always came with a size. A pointer was a 2-D object to the hardware. It had a location, and a size. The weirdness of C/C++ pointer types is an attempt to recapture some of the elegance of earlier hardware in a later era where the hardware forgot about data safety.
Location + size pointers are referred to as "wide pointers" in modern C++, AFAIK. You're right though -- C's syntax is a desperate attempt to make the size portion of a wide pointer into a compile-time issue rather than a run-time issue, mostly for performance reasons.
bro lost me before the ad break 💀
Bro really said bro 💀
@@kingpen5866 bro really said bro cause i said bro 💀
Bro realy saic bro to some bro who realy said bro to bro 's comment 💀@@GL0RYS
bro is a pointer to a bro that points to a bro
@@VictorMartinez-vi7jx bros making sense 🙏
I finally understood. The type signatures are provided not the obvious way around, but outside in.
For example:
int x()
is a function named "x", returning an integer. But instead of "x", I can put something different and it will mean, put the whole function inside whatever is in that position. For example "int (*x)()" means to put the function inside the *x. So It's a pointer to a function.
But it's not just functions, it's **everything**
if we analyze the "int (*x)()" again we get:
int , which means to put the integer inside something
that something:
()
It's a function! which means, that we put our int iside the return paramater of that function
what's something:
*
it's a pointer! which means, we put our whole function with integer return type into a pointer.
that something:
x
It's a name "x" which means, we put our whole pointer to a function with a return type of integer into the name "x"
Let's do another example:
char *(*(*(**x[])())[])();
it's a char, which is in a pointer, which is in the return type of a function, which is in a pointer which is in an array which is in a pointer, which is in the return type of a function, which is in a pointer, which is in a pointer, which is in an array, which is in "x"
Nah
I mean if you understand it then great, but nah
Its name first, then sufix left-to-right, then prefix right-to-left, with () being the sufix function arguments operator. I best understand it same as the compiler, start from the inside and go out, sufix prefix exit-braket. Its doesnt matter here, yes, but this also reminds you how other operators work like array access and dereference operators. *x[8] means "take the 8th member of x and dereference", where as (*x)[8] means "dereference x and take the 8th member of that"
my honest reaction to this is: what the f$@% is that ?!?
5:31 and at this point I soundly fell asleep and had a very restful night in dreamland, not worrying about pointers to pointers or functions calling pointers or anything returning an int again...
thank you I was confused by pointers and wasn't sure I should get back to trying to learn C but your video made me stop questioning myself and convinced me to abandon the idea of getting back to it for good. like
Actually the best explanation of these bullshit functions I’ve seen, thanks!
"Did you explain them?"
"Yes"
"What did it cost you?"
"Everything"
6:18 I too like words LMAO
I gave this video a thumbs up even before watching it. Anyone who tries to explain pointers to us 'dumbdumbs' is definitely a modern-day Prometheus.
Bro I sat here with a notebook trying to understand, which I did pretty easily. Excellent explanation for such a troll video!
You know what's funny, I've been programming in C for 15 years and I was confused at he first one. But after you broke it down I understood it perfectly. I could even see situations where it would be quite useful to know. Great video, hope you're enjoying learning computer science. I still am
I've forgotten my name after learning about pointers from him. This person went insane before completing pointer😄
I FINALLY GOT POINTERS after more than 15 tutorials and another 15 "explanation" videos, you somehow made my brain click. Thank you so much!
"Go insane?" GO MENTIONED RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
WE GOIN OUT OF THE HOOD WITH THIS ONE 🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️
sanest go programmer
I think that this is 100% the reason for the existence of the typedef keyword
As hairy and convoluted as the examples got, you did a fantastic job of breaking them down. I’ve spent most of my time coding in python and Java, so have thankfully never had to use pointers in practice. I do, however, remember the outright confusion experienced during a college C++ class…
Such an awesome teaching style!
Why: If you're a postman in a small town and they ask you to "deliver this package to that weird yellow house", you'll figure out where to deliver what in a reasonable amount of time. But if you need to deliver a massive amount of packages, that are all stored in different places inside a big warehouse, to a couple of skyscrapers with multiple delivery points per floor, you'll have a much easier time if the exact address is provided.
I don't understand, at 6:09, if the array of pointers to functions receive a pointer to a pointer of characters, where do I find the point of living?
Maybe we lost the point of life somewhere along the way
An array of function pointers sounds like something that could be extremely useful,
but I can't imagine any situation where it would be useful
You can find them all over the place in object oriented code
0:14 as soon as i read "france" i subscribed and liked the video
I love France
🇩🇪
Allez vous faire mettre.
Thanks for the colors that help in pointing what you're pointing at so that your point can go straight to the point of my eyes and gets deleted any way which I point out that there's no point in this. There are some qwerty typists out there who like to type the word "point".
Entertaining and very educational for me. Seeing different uses of pointers that you tried to demonstrate and describe them made my me intrigue, but at the same time dizzy. 😂
1. Love the suffering
2. Love the use of digimon story cyber sleuth ost, its suitable considering the BS that is the digivolution tree.
3. Great video
To be honest, even though university tests your knowledge of things sometimes the examples are so obscure that instead of writing what is this I would just write "Change the implementation because it will absolutely never go through any code review"
This video made me cry
what I get from this is that the song at the end rocks.
Im watching this at 3:00am and yeah my brain is pretty much fried at this point
Your memory view and c debugger in vscode look very nice. Could you do a video on how you set this up or just gimme some info lol im jealous.
same
me too
Fr
Came to learn about pointers, returned with all my braincells drained. 10/10
Ok how was this convoluted mess the thing that actually taught me how pointers work lol
"am not going to double check that" - thanks God you are are still human😂
I think this video actually made these easier to parse.
My favorite programming channel
Even the parser gave up, and he's still going
Me: HOW ARE YOU FREEING ALL OF THIS
The Heap: Freeing? YOU THINK THIS IS GETTING FREED?
Im not even going to lie. This video did more for me than any amount of researching and googling. Believe it or not, i actually learned how to read pointer syntax from this cluster fuck of a video.
somehow this made me understand pointers better than 4 years in uni
...how the fuc did this actually help me understand pointers.
For some reason I've been reading c++ order of operations(programming has a word for it i dunno it's 3am) from left to right thinking whatever is on the leftmost side (so often a basic type declaration like void, int e.t.c) was the first important thing and ive just been subconsciously remembering to prioritise asteriskt and parenthesis for, who knows why reasons, but if you just loop out from the variable/object/parameter/satan/x, remembering to prioritise the right side (functions or arrays(/square-brackets) before the left side, normal parenthesis firstforemost, then it goes in a back and forth in a repeatable pattern.
I will guarantee you that I'll have forgotten this by tomorrow when I wake up but cool video man. 10/10 would "asmr to study to" again
you shoud have mentioned operator precedence.
and also thr syntax related to those concepts perfectly fit into english grammar. as a Türk, ı can say it in english (up to some point) but cannot think of its meaning because we build up the noun phrases other way around
"Great, you've explained these quite well. Now use them."
You had me at "Fucker". Subscribed.
1:12 this is a criminal way to use malloc
At some POINT I've stopped perceive word "pointer" as some meaningful entity and instead started to interpret it as some weird IKEA furniture name
The way i look at it is, the way you declare a pointer, is the way you access it. So if you got int *(*p[]), you'd access the innermost value (being the int) in the same way: *(*p[i]). And then you work your way backwards
To make the point(er) clearer ill go through this. So you access the int by doing *(*p[]), so *p[] is an array of pointers to int, and *p points to an array of pointers to int, and p is a pointer to an array of pointers to int
anddd.... u just had to make this pun
The only time my brain relaxed was watching that ad in this video
LOOLL MARIO KART BGM it takes me back
1:10 I'm pretty sure you can also use sizeof() directly instead of calculating manually
The person who loves pointers, this video is to make him hate pointers
Thank you. Now I'll send this to my friend 😂
Those complex function declarations make me think of complex relational database.
Once you pause the video at 5:34 for 10 minutes you will finally be able to crack it as you know the symbols are *,(),[], are a ""function"" call in your head return the words from your mouth pointer, function, array,etc...
But the the thing i still don't get is why you need a pointer to a pointer? Is it useful. If yes then how?
I lasted 2 minutes, then my brain exploded, and i am a programmer...
I wish this was a joke of some kind, then I wouldn't want to cry
I buried this nightmare 20 yrs ago. After watching I'm sure I'll get one tonight.
3:29 --> See line 15 (3:21) for further clarification.
In short, line 25 is saying that you want to first dereference the pointer, followed by selecting the function at index 0 for that pointer; then you have to de-reference that index (the array itself decays to a pointer containing the addresses of each function) in order to call the function you want from that double pointer. i.e., createFunctionPointerArray() returns "& -> {&add, &subtract}". You're making an embedded function library, I guess you could say, that the variable references, and you have to dereference all those pointers to access the function you want. Easy to understand?
*Lecturer:* _"What is a char * ( *( * ( * * x [ ] )() ) [ ] ) (); ?"_
*Me:* _"Can you use it in a snippet?"_
*Lecturer:*
There's probably already been someone saying this, but at 1:09, the allocation for the FUCKER variable was technically not correct, since alignment could see the struct end up larger than the raw data it contains. For instance, if we used an int after the char[6], most compilers would add a 2-byte padding before it to ensure that the address of the int is divisible by 4 (size of a 32 bit int which I assume is what int is)
In general, the safest option is to always use malloc(sizeof()); it'll give you the correct size the compiler will assign your structs
A pointer consists of: 7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 12.
I.e. 7 bits unused, 12 bits for the physical offset in memory and the 9's are offsets into a page "tree" if you will . Most CPU's today only use four-level pages, so the top 16 bits (instead of 7) are unused - but Intel is starting to use five-level pages too. It's also why pages are 2^12 (4096) in size, and why large pages can be 2MB (2^(12+9)) and 1GB (2^(12+9+9)) respectively. You can cast a pointer to a number, and shift the bits into different values to clearly see how there's a clear pattern when you allocate memory etc.
im new to the concept of pointers and memory allocation, since i just started learning c++ a few days ago. decided to spend an hour or so looking at this after learning the basics of pointers until i feel like i understood enough about how it all ties together, i guess i learned more about it but now i have a painful headache...
Understanding pointers, is like the Great Barrier between amateur devs and the pros! Because THIS is a concept in which knowing how computers actually works, helps tremendously!
Pointers are like your fingers, fingers that are pointing at something (aliased "x"), that object "x" is stored in an area known as the memory address
A pointer holds the memory address containing variable "x"
To obtain the value located in the memory address of variable x pointed by the pointer, use `&ptr`
Now, a pointer to a pointer holds the memory address containing the original pointer object pointing to variable "x" above
Repeat to keep getting the memory address of everything the previous level is pointing
also all this pointer magic can be neatly swept under the rug if you use a lot of typedefs with proper names, makes the code much easier to understand for everyone
Idk what the fuck happened to me but i was laughing like a fucking psycho everytime i hear the fucking word POINTER.
Wow! Now I can send this to my prof
Thanks for the pointers!
6:29 in which situation you may use it ?
Hopefully never
Well, obviously when you need an array of pointers to pointers to functions that receive "a pointer to a character; and a pointer to a function that receives a pointer to a character and returns a pointer to an int" and returns a pointer to an array of pointers to functions that receive "a pointer to a pointer of characters, and a pointer to a function that returns a pointer to a character" as arguments, and return a pointer to an integer
@@Maya4Kand when may you need that?
@@apurbosarker112 lol never or at 1/10e1000 of the time @Maya4K just copy and paste the code explainations writen in the video
I'm assuming the brackets that aren't used or don't have anything in them are just placeholders for new nested variables and code to be added in the future?... Either that or code that already exists with those brackets in mind and are connected to similar code.
Hey, i'm learning by myself, how did you make your vscode like that? 0:56
He is using the debugging features. Install the c extensions on vscode and look about how to use gdb debugging. Its a bit of a rabbit hole depending on the project.
The biggest problem with pointers is batshit insane C syntax.
this actually makes sense
Going over the needlessly idiotically complex examples legitimately helped me understand pointers more lol
THANKS To YOU now my BRAIN is working *totally* properly
Pro Tip: Just add another */& or put around parentheses until you get no compilation errors.
I'm having PTSD from university every time you say pointers more than 2 times in a row
this man has ascended above gods.
Omg I never understood pointers so well as I do right now thanks to this video
0:08 x is a pointer to an array of pointers to functions that returns an integer. Not that complicated to us Programmars : )
Everytime I paused and I am shocked how i get it before you start telling how to understand it. Maybe because i have been doing reverse engineering and malware stuff for long time now. Those codes actually have hell of typecasting with different data types and sizes. But greater video !!! ❤
I'm getting a new computer soon and I'm absolutely going to make stupid and dangerous C programs with this knowledge now. Last time, I managed to make a program that randomly crashes x11