Skip to content
Advertisement

C++, addresses in array [closed]

I have some sort of funny question about addresses in C++. I have such code: 

#include <iostream>
#include <cstdlib>
using namespace std;

int main() {
    int N = 50 + rand() % 151;
    int arr[N];
    int arr2[N];
    int *ptr1;
    ptr1 = &arr[0];

    for(int i = 0; i < N; i++){
        cout << "Address1: "<< &arr[i]<< "t" << "Address2: " << &arr2[i] << endl;
    }
}

This code works, but allocation of addresses fears me. Does such output legal? I think that it is kind of weird, that second array, locates earlier in memory than 1st array. If someone knows what’s the problem, please explain me what is wrong, because according to definition order, first must be addresses of 1st array, than addresses of second. That was compiled with g++ in Ubuntu.

Address1: 0xbf9ab1b8    Address2: 0xbf9ab028
Address1: 0xbf9ab1bc    Address2: 0xbf9ab02c
Address1: 0xbf9ab1c0    Address2: 0xbf9ab030
Address1: 0xbf9ab1c4    Address2: 0xbf9ab034
Address1: 0xbf9ab1c8    Address2: 0xbf9ab038
Address1: 0xbf9ab1cc    Address2: 0xbf9ab03c
Address1: 0xbf9ab1d0    Address2: 0xbf9ab040
Address1: 0xbf9ab1d4    Address2: 0xbf9ab044
Address1: 0xbf9ab1d8    Address2: 0xbf9ab048
Address1: 0xbf9ab1dc    Address2: 0xbf9ab04c
Address1: 0xbf9ab1e0    Address2: 0xbf9ab050
Address1: 0xbf9ab1e4    Address2: 0xbf9ab054
...

Advertisement

Answer

I think that it is kind of wierd, that second array, locates earlier in memory than 1st array.

It’s not. It’s perfectly normal.

according to defenition order, first must be adresses of 1st array, than adresses of second.

I don’t know where you heard that the addresses of objects in block scope increment according to definition order. Generally, due to the nature of how stacks work, the opposite is actually true.

It really shouldn’t matter to you either way; your computer can place the objects wherever it wants.

Pick up a book on computer architecture for more information.

Advertisement