什么更有意义 - char* string 或 char *string?

What makes more sense - char* string or char *string?(什么更有意义 - char* string 或 char *string?)

问题描述

我目前正在学习 C++，并且遇到了很多以空字符结尾的字符串.这让我思考，在声明指针时什么更有意义:

I'm learning C++ at the moment, and I'm coming across a lot of null-terminated strings. This has got me thinking, what makes more sense when declaring pointers:

char* string

或

char *string

?对我来说，char* 格式更有意义，因为字符串"的类型更有意义.是指向字符的指针，而不是字符.但是，我通常看到后一种格式.显然，这也适用于参考文献.

? To me, the char* format makes more sense, because the type of "string" is a pointer to a char, rather than a char. However, I generally see the latter format. This applies to references as well, obviously.

有人能告诉我后一种格式是否有合乎逻辑的原因吗?

Could someone tell me if there is a logical reason for the latter format?

推荐答案

在以下声明中:

char* string1, string2;

string1 是一个字符指针，而 string2 只是单个字符.因此，声明的格式通常如下:

string1 is a character pointer, but string2 is a single character only. For this reason, the declaration is usually formatted like:

char *string1, string2;

这使得 * 适用于 string1 但不适用于 string2 稍微清楚一点.好的做法是避免在一个声明中声明多个变量，尤其是当其中一些是指针时.

which makes it slightly clearer that the * applies to string1 but not string2. Good practice is to avoid declaring multiple variables in one declaration, especially if some of them are pointers.

这篇关于什么更有意义 - char* string 或 char *string?的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持编程学习网！