static_cast
和 reinterpret_cast
似乎都可以很好地将 void*
转换为另一种指针类型.是否有充分的理由偏爱其中一个?
Both static_cast
and reinterpret_cast
seem to work fine for casting void*
to another pointer type. Is there a good reason to favor one over the other?
使用 static_cast
:它是最窄的强制转换,准确地描述了此处进行的转换.
Use static_cast
: it is the narrowest cast that exactly describes what conversion is made here.
有一种误解,认为使用 reinterpret_cast
会更好,因为它意味着完全忽略类型安全,只是从 A 转换到 B".
There’s a misconception that using reinterpret_cast
would be a better match because it means"completely ignore type safety and just cast from A to B".
然而,这实际上并没有描述 reinterpret_cast
的效果.相反,reinterpret_cast
有多种含义,因为所有这些含义都认为reinterpret_cast
执行的映射是实现定义的."[5.2.10.3]
However, this doesn’t actually describe the effect of a reinterpret_cast
. Rather, reinterpret_cast
has a number of meanings, for all of which holds that "the mapping performed by reinterpret_cast
is implementation-defined." [5.2.10.3]
但是在从 void*
转换到 T*
的特殊情况下,映射完全由标准定义;即,在不改变其地址的情况下为无类型指针分配类型.
But in the particular case of casting from void*
to T*
the mapping is completely well-defined by the standard; namely, to assign a type to a typeless pointer without changing its address.
这是选择 static_cast
的原因.
此外,可以说更重要的是,reinterpret_cast
的每次使用都是彻头彻尾的危险,因为它实际上将任何东西转换为其他任何东西(对于指针),而 static_cast
限制更多,从而提供更好的保护水平.这已经让我避免了错误,因为我不小心试图将一种指针类型强制转换为另一种类型.
Additionally, and arguably more important, is the fact that every use of reinterpret_cast
is downright dangerous because it converts anything to anything else really (for pointers), while static_cast
is much more restrictive, thus providing a better level of protection. This has already saved me from bugs where I accidentally tried to coerce one pointer type into another.
这篇关于我应该在将 void* 转换为任何内容时使用 static_cast 还是 reinterpret_cast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跟版网!