Skip to main content

the Differences Between static_cast and reinterpret_cast

The operators static_cast and reinterpret_cast are similar: they both convert an object to an object of a different type. However, they aren't interchangeable. Static_cast uses the type information available at compile time to perform the conversion, making the necessary adjustments between the source and target types. Thus, its operation is relatively safe. On the other hand, reinterpret_cast simply reinterprets the bit pattern of a given object without changing its binary representation. To show the difference between the two, let's look at the following example:
int n = 9;
double d = static_cast < double > (n);
In this example, we convert an int to a double. The binary representation of these types is very different. In order to convert the int 9 to a double, static_cast needs to properly pad the additional bytes of d. As expected, the result of the conversion is 9.0. Now let's see how reinterpret_cast behaves in this context:
int n = 9;
double d = reinterpret_cast< double & > (n);
This time the results are unpredictable. After the cast, d contains a garbage value rather than 9.0. This is because reinterpret_cast simply copied the bit pattern of n into d as is, without making the necessary adjustments. For this reason, you should use reinterpret_cast sparingly and judiciously.
Labels:

Comments

Anonymous said…
But where do we actually use reinterpret_cast ?
May 19, 2008 at 12:35 AM
Anonymous said…
reinterpret_cast is basically a bit manipulation casting.

Uses ex:
Let us say we are using receiving some object as buffer. we are not sure if what type of object that buffer may be holding. again directly assigning to a specific type of object may not be useful. We can use this reinterpret_cast to cast that buffer to some object type.

Ex. 2. if you are receiving some blob of object stored in databases or files which can be used to construct the objects we can use this.
June 18, 2008 at 4:10 AM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Explain Polymorphism and Flavors of Polymorphism...

Polymorphism is the ability of different objects to react in an individual manner to the same message. This notion was imported from natural languages. For example, the verb "to close" means different things when applied to different objects. Closing a door, closing a bank account, or closing a program's window are all different actions; their exact meaning is determined by the object on which the action is performed. Most object-oriented languages implement polymorphism only in the form of virtual functions. But C++ has two more mechanisms of static (meaning: compile-time) polymorphism: Operator overloading. Applying the += operator to integers or string objects, for example, is interpreted by each of these objects in an individual manner. Obviously, the underlying implementation of += differs in every type. Yet, intuitively, we can predict what results are. Templates. A vector of integers, for example, reacts differently from a vector of string objects when it receives ...
17 comments
Read more

Function name mangling for C++ and Java

G++ internals - Mangling Both C++ and Jave provide overloaded function and methods, which are methods with the same types but different parameter lists. Selecting the correct version is done at compile time. Though the overloaded functions have the same name in the source code, they need to be translated into different assembler-level names, since typical assemblers and linkers cannot handle overloading. This process of encoding the parameter types with the method name into a unique name is called name mangling . The inverse process is called demangling . It is convenient that C++ and Java use compatible mangling schemes, since the makes life easier for tools such as gdb, and it eases integration between C++ and Java. Note there is also a standard "Jave Native Interface" (JNI) which implements a different calling convention, and uses a different mangling scheme. The JNI is a rather abstract ABI so Java can call methods written in C or C++; we are concerned he...
5 comments
Read more