#include<stdio.h>
void MaxAndMin(int * arr,int size,int **mxptr,int **mnptr)
{
int * max,* min;
int i;
*max=*min=arr[0];
for(i=0;i<size;i++)
{
if(*max<arr[i])
*max=arr[i];
if(*min>arr[i])
*min=arr[i];
}
*mxptr=max;
*mnptr=min;
}
int main(void)
{
int *maxPtr;
int *minPtr;
int arr[5];
int i;
for(i=0;i<sizeof(arr)/sizeof(int);i++)
{
printf ("Enter an integer %d:",i+1);
scanf("%d",&arr[i]);
}
MaxAndMin(arr,sizeof(arr)/sizeof(int),&maxPtr,&minPtr);
printf("%d %d",*maxPtr,*minPtr);
return 0;
}
The code here and
#include<stdio.h>
void MaxAndMin(int * arr,int size,int **mxptr,int **mnptr)
{
int * max,* min;
int i;
max=min=&arr[0];
for(i=0;i<size;i++)
{
if(*max<arr[i])
max=&arr[i];
if(*min>arr[i])
min=&arr[i];
}
*mxptr=max;
*mnptr=min;
}
int main(void)
{
int *maxPtr;
int *minPtr;
int arr[5];
int i;
for(i=0;i<sizeof(arr)/sizeof(int);i++)
{
printf ("Enter an integer %d:",i+1);
scanf("%d",&arr[i]);
}
MaxAndMin(arr,sizeof(arr)/sizeof(int),&maxPtr,&minPtr);
printf("%d %d",*maxPtr,*minPtr);
return 0;
}
The difference between these codes is that the MaxAndMin function uses *min and min in the for statement, respectively The above code doesn't seem to be a big problem, but I want to know why the above code doesn't work properly while the lower one doesn't work!! (FYI, the code is a code that receives 5 integers and finds the minimum value of the maximum value.) I know a lot of other ways, so I'd appreciate it if you could find the wrong part in this way.)
pointer double call-by-reference
In the above code, max and min are pointer variables that point to address values, but no address of any variable is assigned. Therefore, assigning arr[0] to the variable pointed by the pointer variable inevitably results in an access violation error, provided that max and min are initialized to NULL.
© 2024 OneMinuteCode. All rights reserved.