Explaining Pointers Until I Go Insane

[@MultsElMesco]

Hello everyone! I've been doing some mix and match with my content style lately. Just trying new things. Let me know what you think :) To try everything Brilliant has to offer-free-for a full 30 days, visit brilliant.org/Mults You’ll also get 20% off an annual premium subscription.

[@mxblock]

Not a regular viewer (yet), but - This right here is literally a master piece for me. Educational, something interesting, memes (not to in you'r face / loud audio - still prominent to be entertaining), relatability, the ever growing crazieness, straight to the point, not to short nor to long, right volume for music and mic, the outro song - all just perfect. Keep it up!

[@NeostormXLMAX]

I recognize that digimon cybersleuth ost

[@oioio-yb9dw]

You escaped pointer hell with that add 😅

[@oioio-yb9dw]

Subscribed🫡

[@XinTongXia-d2o]

btw, anyone know what's font used in the video? looks pretty nice

[@tuhkiscgibin6627]

If a codebase has any of this stuff, you'll know it's been backdoored.

[@atomgutan8064]

lol exactly. this is extreme obfuscation

[@tuhkiscgibin6627]

@@atomgutan8064Some Jia Tan shit

[@atomgutan8064]

@@tuhkiscgibin6627 lmao this is the new backdoor reference now ig

[@avoavoavo]

Once committed, always committed. No explanation is needed. It works.

[@tosemusername]

Well, the person who backdoored it understood it, so jokes on you :P

[@vulnoryx]

"say pointer again" "fuck you"

[@user-qr4jf4tv2x]

is that rick and morty

[@vulnoryx]

@@user-qr4jf4tv2x yes

[@nexushare8105]

damn how did i read it in rick and morty voice in my head 😆

[@vulnoryx]

@@user-qr4jf4tv2x indeed it is

[@ThisIsAnAccount]

Did you just... insult me with a **pointer**? Son of a..

[@Suspaghetti]

You realize how complicated pointer syntax is when the best explanation of how to read complex statements is in a funny YT video

[@Mr.Not_Sure]

Well, nobody writes them in the first place. That's why `typedef` exists.

[@garfield1964]

it's in a funny YT video because the concept--spiral rule--was documented before the youtuber was born and is prolific amongst anyone who has made efforts to properly understand C

[@Suspaghetti]

@@garfield1964 Yes, definitely. It's just that most [modern] beginner C books and tutorials skip this, even though it's essential. I was actually introduced to the spiral rule by this video and it blows my mind how not widespread it is, given its simplicity.

[@Spitfire720]

Aight I'm never listening to the word "pointer" again

[@deltamico]

"pointer" You can read it instead. You're welcome

[@nodrance]

I point on her... Wait

[@deleteddeleted1940]

learn about references!

[@jeremymcadams7743]

Let me give you a few pointers about how to get over this issue

[@mux1c]

I'd like your comment, but it's at 911 and I can't ruin that

[@eleinaedelweiss6215]

Who the hell would write the last one, without questioning their lives decisions.

[@etherstrip]

…people making youtube videos?

[@Elias01056]

who the fuck would use *

[@danilbutygin238]

@@Elias01056 i am

[@Elias01056]

@@danilbutygin238 why?

[@danilbutygin238]

@@Elias01056 long-term habit

[@Hallilo]

I honestly never had any issues understanding basic and more advanced pointer stuff, but THIS is some actual good stuff LMAO great video

[@ThisShitWontWor]

12 years old me learning C++ : "Ok so, its a box containing... a box, ok?, containing a box... fuck it"

[@kaustubhsonar4613]

Bring me that stuff which you are smoking

[@user-sb5vt8iy5q]

I got almost all of them in under 20 seconds, except the last one, I didn't even try to get it because at that point what are you doing

[@ry6554]

Honestly, An array of functions sounds pretty dope. Nevermind, an array of pointers to functions sounds pretty dope.

[@comradepeter87]

ain't that the same? or are we saying "an array of pointers to function pointers" (effectively double-indirection) in the second one?

[@theepicguy6575]

Well, you can't have arrays of functions in the first place Only pointers to functions

[@PhthaloJohnson]

In C, you actually cannot store functions inside arrays anyway, the compiler will silently convert that code into a pointer to that function instead.

[@jrstf]

Is not every C++ member function referenced through an array of pointers to functions?

[@pitri_hub]

@@jrstf Per default, member functions are just statically compiled into the calling code. But it is true for virtual functions. They are referenced in the vtable, which exists for each type with virtual functions. Each of these objects then has an internal pointer to its respective vtable, which contains the pointers to the implementation defined procedures. This is how dynamic polymorphism is implemented.

[@dipereira0123]

to whoever reached a point in life where you ended up here or doing this, i really hope you find inner peace one day...

[@kyumullo]

A Pointer in life

[@CapeSkill]

@@kyumullo ba dum tss.

[@JoaoJGabriel]

It all can get stupidly complicated as we've seen, but the syntax follows simple rules: 1. start reading from the identifier out 2. favor [ ] and ( ) over * int (*(*x)[ ]) ( ): - Following rule #1, we start at x x - The identifier x is alone in parentheses with an asterisk, so it is [§1] a pointer *x - Outside of the parentheses, we follow rule #2, so it is [§2] an array (*x)[ ] - We're left with an asterisk inside the parentheses, so [§3] pointers *(*x)[ ] - Outside of the parentheses, rule #2, [§4] functions (*(*x)[ ])( ) - The functions return [§5] int putting §1, §2, §3, §4 and §5 together: x is (§1) a pointer to (§2) an array of (§3) pointers to (§4) functions that return (§5) an integer Once you got the hang of it, you can rewrite the example like: * [ ] * ( ) -> int And stitch things together in a way that makes sense. "->" means "returns" and it's optional/redundant (anything immediately after parentheses in this notation is a return anyway) Take the example of 5:34: [ ] * * (* char, * (* char) -> * int) -> [ ] * (* * char, * ( ) -> * char) -> * int Array of pointers to a pointer to a function that takes (a pointer to a character and a pointer to a function that takes (a pointer to a character) and returns a pointer to an integer) and returns an array of pointers to a function that takes (a pointer to a pointer to a character and a pointer to a function that returns a pointer to a character) and returns a pointer to an integer It looks insane, but it's not that difficult to wrap your head around if you're writing it following those two simple rules

[@nexushare8105]

bro i was with you util i expanded ur explanation... after expanding it i sad( i aint reading all this sheet lol) , but hey, great that u can explain this

[@JoaoJGabriel]

@@nexushare8105 maybe there's a way to be more concise but then that's me who can't bother xD

[@lightlezs7048]

My man, using asterisks here for anything but pointers is fucking evil, was there really no other way?

[@JoaoJGabriel]

@@lightlezs7048 hahahaha good point, I'm gonna change that

[@JoaoJGabriel]

@@lightlezs7048 better?

[@BaneDestabapillado]

Small tip for 1:20, you can order malloc like you did just by manually asking for each memory "sizeof(char) * 6..." but if you make a tipedef of your struct, you can just ask for a "sizeof(FUCKER)" and it will do the same, but far easier to read, and simpler

[@halflight8811]

this is what I understood from 3:10 - arr[0] -> func1 => int1 - arr [1] -> func2 => int2 x ->arr - arr[2] -> func3 => int3 - arr[3] -> func4 => int4 - arr[4] -> func5 => int5

[@teerathagarwal9352]

Seems correct. However, getting to return the integer by calling those functions seems a different story. I guess it be something like this: (*x)[2]();

[@moneteezee]

im actually glad i found this video, you explained this well and now i know how to interpret those long lines

[@NicolasChanCSY]

A programmer goes to therapy. Therapist: Please tell me what you are scared of. Programmer: I am scared of pointers. Therapist: Okay, let me give you an array of pointers to handle them. Programmer: 😱😱😱

[@SwiftyTheSword94]

The worst part is the therapist passes by reference.

[@GL0RYS]

bro lost me before the ad break 💀

[@kingpen5866]

Bro really said bro 💀

[@GL0RYS]

@@kingpen5866 bro really said bro cause i said bro 💀

[@fodetraore6666]

Bro realy saic bro to some bro who realy said bro to bro 's comment 💀​@@GL0RYS

[@VictorMartinez-vi7jx]

bro is a pointer to a bro that points to a bro

[@GL0RYS]

@@VictorMartinez-vi7jx bros making sense 🙏

[@tvardero]

6:00 Bro is holding the entire class inside his variable definition The God Variable.

[@dawiddulian2403]

A class that someone parameterised the hell out of, it's like "okay, let x point to containers upon containers of functions (class) that parse strings... but in a waythat is so parametrised and specific that you need to parse other string in your chosen function and based on result of parsing you get the answer of your call of x... ...the anser being a f***ing array ofpointers to functions! So basically the class that is x is not all - you now use this class to hold the answers of called(/callable) functions and use THEM as your ACTUAL functions that themselves take an array of strings and parse those strings collection based on (presumably, because it doesn't make much sense otherwise) the original character that is returned from chosen constexpr function (due to no parameters)... ...and all that returns an adress of where the value of it is stored, YOU KNOW, LIKE IT'S TOTALLY NORMAL.

[@norude]

I think, most of the confusion comes from the syntax. For example, int (*(*x)[])() in Rust, would be Box> "Box" is Rust's pointer i32 is Rust's int

[@spacemario]

If I understood it correctly, that's a pointer to a vector of pointers to functions that return an int, right?

[@norude]

yes, it's just a lot of angle brackets, in a way that actually makes sense C works the other way around

[@shanesnover4048]

Your outermost Box is unnecessary indirection as the Vec already places the memory on the heap.

[@norude]

@@shanesnover4048 that's true, but not relevant

[@jrstf]

Imagine programming in a language where you can actually specify the type of a value (i32) rather than some kind of a suggestion which varies in meaning in every implementation and even with platform specific switches on the command line.

[@no-ld3hz]

3:24 funnily enough this is how dynamic dispatch works in c++, each class (implicitly) creates a pointer to a global array of function pointers. This is also known as a virtual table or vtable/vftable as it contains the list of "virtual" functions for that class.

[@mysterry2000]

This video is amazing, now I can play that game with my friends: Team A: Take a shot every time he doesn't say "pointer" Team B: Take 3 shots every two times he says "pointer" Let's see who wins 💪

[@James-ne9td]

"For example, if I use this struct 'Fucker'" caught me completely off guard XD My main takeaway from this video though is that as a C# dev for Unity, I shouldn't touch C++ with a 5 foot pole or else risk entering pointer hell.

[@vibaj16]

no one actually uses crazy pointer stuff like this. Actually useful pointer stuff is simple and often feels quite elegant.

[@happygofishing]

random swearing is peak reddit humour

[@James-ne9td]

@@vibaj16 tbf, I was being slightly hyperbolic. I do want to get round to learning C++ eventually but the combination of pointers, header files, garbage collection, and syntax is just a lot.

[@Jason-b9t]

@@vibaj16 It's really simple.... The library will only use (void* buf, size_t n) for ALL types. C believes that smart users know that the void* returned by the function is a specific type among the 100+ custom types, it will be a linklist + table with a specific internal mix of pointers to stack and pointers to allocated heap, and then you have to be careful about pointer casts, linklist iteration, use void* to calculate offsets, of course you will remember which one is CHAR8* string and which is CHAR16* string, finally free the heap allocation and perfectly avoid the pointer to the stack. The biggest advantage of C is that it is suitable for keeping your job.

[@Jason-b9t]

It's really simple.... The library will only use (void* buf, size_t n) for ALL custom types. It is linklist + table with a specific internal mix of pointers to stack and pointers to allocated heap, CHAR8* string and which is CHAR16* string.

[@jatinsharma3280]

Man, It felt awesome and confusing at the same time, but thanks to you I come to know the different use of pointers.

[@poleve5409]

function pointers are cool. But everything after it? only for the insane.

[@prism223]

In older computers, especially Lisp machines, pointers always came with a size. A pointer was a 2-D object to the hardware. It had a location, and a size. The weirdness of C/C++ pointer types is an attempt to recapture some of the elegance of earlier hardware in a later era where the hardware forgot about data safety.

[@mage3690]

Location + size pointers are referred to as "wide pointers" in modern C++, AFAIK. You're right though -- C's syntax is a desperate attempt to make the size portion of a wide pointer into a compile-time issue rather than a run-time issue, mostly for performance reasons.

[@adnanrasheed4366]

I've forgotten my name after learning about pointers from him. This person went insane before completing pointer😄

[@iCrimzon]

"Go insane?" GO MENTIONED RAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

[@batatanna]

WE GOIN OUT OF THE HOOD WITH THIS ONE 🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️🗣️

[@gruberu]

sanest go programmer

[@Sky-The-Second]

Bro I sat here with a notebook trying to understand, which I did pretty easily. Excellent explanation for such a troll video!

[@finmat95]

00:07 "So what is this?" "Obviously A NIGHTMARE."

[@ANTI_UTTP_FOR_REAL]

"Did you explain them?" "Yes" "What did it cost you?" "Everything"

[@dimi144]

I think that this is 100% the reason for the existence of the typedef keyword

[@love-thugger]

Your memory view and c debugger in vscode look very nice. Could you do a video on how you set this up or just gimme some info lol im jealous.

[@siddharthbhatia8815]

same

[@nexushare8105]

me too

[@draftofspasiba2]

Fr

[@norude]

I finally understood. The type signatures are provided not the obvious way around, but outside in. For example: int x() is a function named "x", returning an integer. But instead of "x", I can put something different and it will mean, put the whole function inside whatever is in that position. For example "int (*x)()" means to put the function inside the *x. So It's a pointer to a function. But it's not just functions, it's **everything** if we analyze the "int (*x)()" again we get: int , which means to put the integer inside something that something: () It's a function! which means, that we put our int iside the return paramater of that function what's something: * it's a pointer! which means, we put our whole function with integer return type into a pointer. that something: x It's a name "x" which means, we put our whole pointer to a function with a return type of integer into the name "x" Let's do another example: char *(*(*(**x[])())[])(); it's a char, which is in a pointer, which is in the return type of a function, which is in a pointer which is in an array which is in a pointer, which is in the return type of a function, which is in a pointer, which is in a pointer, which is in an array, which is in "x"

[@sasho_b.]

Nah I mean if you understand it then great, but nah Its name first, then sufix left-to-right, then prefix right-to-left, with () being the sufix function arguments operator. I best understand it same as the compiler, start from the inside and go out, sufix prefix exit-braket. Its doesnt matter here, yes, but this also reminds you how other operators work like array access and dereference operators. *x[8] means "take the 8th member of x and dereference", where as (*x)[8] means "dereference x and take the 8th member of that"

[@ahmadalzibary4337]

my honest reaction to this is: what the f$@% is that ?!?

[@aberryth_dev]

I don't understand, at 6:09, if the array of pointers to functions receive a pointer to a pointer of characters, where do I find the point of living?

[@MartinDerTolle]

Maybe we lost the point of life somewhere along the way

[@kraqur]

5:31 and at this point I soundly fell asleep and had a very restful night in dreamland, not worrying about pointers to pointers or functions calling pointers or anything returning an int again...

[@josephmazor725]

Actually the best explanation of these bullshit functions I’ve seen, thanks!

[@bubbleopter]

Such an awesome teaching style!

[@DavidSchiess]

Why: If you're a postman in a small town and they ask you to "deliver this package to that weird yellow house", you'll figure out where to deliver what in a reasonable amount of time. But if you need to deliver a massive amount of packages, that are all stored in different places inside a big warehouse, to a couple of skyscrapers with multiple delivery points per floor, you'll have a much easier time if the exact address is provided.

[@Sea_Otter]

I gave this video a thumbs up even before watching it. Anyone who tries to explain pointers to us 'dumbdumbs' is definitely a modern-day Prometheus.

[@amogussusmogus1]

Thanks for the colors that help in pointing what you're pointing at so that your point can go straight to the point of my eyes and gets deleted any way which I point out that there's no point in this. There are some qwerty typists out there who like to type the word "point".

[@Franciscocao]

An array of function pointers sounds like something that could be extremely useful, but I can't imagine any situation where it would be useful

[@chri-k]

You can find them all over the place in object oriented code

[@mothratheresa8582]

1. Love the suffering 2. Love the use of digimon story cyber sleuth ost, its suitable considering the BS that is the digivolution tree. 3. Great video

[@xtremecoding4005]

This video made me cry

[@gabrielkolletalves493]

Absolute certified BANGER at the end.

[@kostabelov6376]

6:18 I too like words LMAO

[@roryb.bellows8617]

You know what's funny, I've been programming in C for 15 years and I was confused at he first one. But after you broke it down I understood it perfectly. I could even see situations where it would be quite useful to know. Great video, hope you're enjoying learning computer science. I still am

[@zFede_Rico]

0:14 as soon as i read "france" i subscribed and liked the video

[@oyoplayer]

I love France

[@lcaainvalid1034]

🇩🇪

[@Paris_Cherry]

Allez vous faire mettre.

[@mvargasmoran]

what I get from this is that the song at the end rocks.

[@Eliask-rv1wq]

thank you I was confused by pointers and wasn't sure I should get back to trying to learn C but your video made me stop questioning myself and convinced me to abandon the idea of getting back to it for good. like

[@therealdia]

Ok how was this convoluted mess the thing that actually taught me how pointers work lol

[@PackPosse]

As hairy and convoluted as the examples got, you did a fantastic job of breaking them down. I’ve spent most of my time coding in python and Java, so have thankfully never had to use pointers in practice. I do, however, remember the outright confusion experienced during a college C++ class…

[@quocanhhbui8271]

Im watching this at 3:00am and yeah my brain is pretty much fried at this point

[@Diamondyoutubization]

I think this video actually made these easier to parse.

[@Komil484]

The way i look at it is, the way you declare a pointer, is the way you access it. So if you got int *(*p[]), you'd access the innermost value (being the int) in the same way: *(*p[i]). And then you work your way backwards To make the point(er) clearer ill go through this. So you access the int by doing *(*p[]), so *p[] is an array of pointers to int, and *p points to an array of pointers to int, and p is a pointer to an array of pointers to int

[@nexushare8105]

anddd.... u just had to make this pun

[@hodayfa000h]

My favorite programming channel

[@madalenaferreira3018]

somehow this made me understand pointers better than 4 years in uni

[@mazyyyy]

I FINALLY GOT POINTERS after more than 15 tutorials and another 15 "explanation" videos, you somehow made my brain click. Thank you so much!

[@montegus]

Hey, i'm learning by myself, how did you make your vscode like that? 0:56

[@GeorgeMixalis]

He is using the debugging features. Install the c extensions on vscode and look about how to use gdb debugging. Its a bit of a rabbit hole depending on the project.

[@watchingwolf8092]

6:29 in which situation you may use it ?

[@_RG99_]

Hopefully never

[@Maya4K]

Well, obviously when you need an array of pointers to pointers to functions that receive "a pointer to a character; and a pointer to a function that receives a pointer to a character and returns a pointer to an int" and returns a pointer to an array of pointers to functions that receive "a pointer to a pointer of characters, and a pointer to a function that returns a pointer to a character" as arguments, and return a pointer to an integer

[@apurbosarker112]

​@@Maya4Kand when may you need that?

[@watchingwolf8092]

@@apurbosarker112 lol never or at 1/10e1000 of the time @Maya4K just copy and paste the code explainations writen in the video

[@Pearforce]

Ive always been critical of the “auto” type being added to c++, but now im starting to see a valid use case…

[@ryangrogan6839]

Im not even going to lie. This video did more for me than any amount of researching and googling. Believe it or not, i actually learned how to read pointer syntax from this cluster fuck of a video.

[@dbf8014]

LOOLL MARIO KART BGM it takes me back

[@farukyldrm8498]

you shoud have mentioned operator precedence. and also thr syntax related to those concepts perfectly fit into english grammar. as a Türk, ı can say it in english (up to some point) but cannot think of its meaning because we build up the noun phrases other way around

[@atharv-naik]

Wow! Now I can send this to my prof

[@ungenieur]

what's the extension that u are using to see the memory ?

[@arthyrgoldengate4599]

Came to learn about pointers, returned with all my braincells drained. 10/10

[@ZehllFierranDayJael]

Entertaining and very educational for me. Seeing different uses of pointers that you tried to demonstrate and describe them made my me intrigue, but at the same time dizzy. 😂

[@sharjeel_mazhar]

@1:17 can you tell me how did you get that memory tab?

[@thfsilvab]

Even the parser gave up, and he's still going

[@Muskar2]

A pointer consists of: 7, 9, 9, 9, 9, 9, 12. I.e. 7 bits unused, 12 bits for the physical offset in memory and the 9's are offsets into a page "tree" if you will . Most CPU's today only use four-level pages, so the top 16 bits (instead of 7) are unused - but Intel is starting to use five-level pages too. It's also why pages are 2^12 (4096) in size, and why large pages can be 2MB (2^(12+9)) and 1GB (2^(12+9+9)) respectively. You can cast a pointer to a number, and shift the bits into different values to clearly see how there's a clear pattern when you allocate memory etc.

[@SasukeUchiha-uy9lf]

The only time my brain relaxed was watching that ad in this video

[@MarcoCeccarelli-g2b]

Which extension do you use to see the memory?

[@jmbeatsbbx]

To be honest, even though university tests your knowledge of things sometimes the examples are so obscure that instead of writing what is this I would just write "Change the implementation because it will absolutely never go through any code review"

[@satoshikei]

Pro Tip: Just add another */& or put around parentheses until you get no compilation errors.

[@Pryvyd9]

This is cool but I like doing practical stuff with pointers. Like serializing objects as if they were binary arrays or creating smart pointers which delete themselves when nobody references them.

[@JacksHQ]

You had me at "Fucker". Subscribed.

[@Morgan_iv]

At some POINT I've stopped perceive word "pointer" as some meaningful entity and instead started to interpret it as some weird IKEA furniture name

[@Quarkee]

...how the fuc did this actually help me understand pointers. For some reason I've been reading c++ order of operations(programming has a word for it i dunno it's 3am) from left to right thinking whatever is on the leftmost side (so often a basic type declaration like void, int e.t.c) was the first important thing and ive just been subconsciously remembering to prioritise asteriskt and parenthesis for, who knows why reasons, but if you just loop out from the variable/object/parameter/satan/x, remembering to prioritise the right side (functions or arrays(/square-brackets) before the left side, normal parenthesis firstforemost, then it goes in a back and forth in a repeatable pattern. I will guarantee you that I'll have forgotten this by tomorrow when I wake up but cool video man. 10/10 would "asmr to study to" again

[@CourierSix01]

The person who loves pointers, this video is to make him hate pointers Thank you. Now I'll send this to my friend 😂

[@jean-kiara]

Those complex function declarations make me think of complex relational database.

[@maxjiang1324]

"am not going to double check that" - thanks God you are are still human😂

[@NullVoid01]

Bro what's your vs code theme it looks nice

[@matheussilveriosilva5412]

Hey man great video, but what is ypur extensions for memory looking and your theme

[@ungenieur]

i think i found it it's : mcu-debug.memory-view

[@matheussilveriosilva5412]

@@ungenieur oh thank you my friend

[@M-MahdiHeydari]

Stack overflowed! 😬

[@cy4n_knight_q8]

I lost you @3:30 I give up

[@48_subhambanerjee22]

0:08 x is a pointer to an array of pointers to functions that returns an integer. Not that complicated to us Programmars : )

[@therelatableladka]

Everytime I paused and I am shocked how i get it before you start telling how to understand it. Maybe because i have been doing reverse engineering and malware stuff for long time now. Those codes actually have hell of typecasting with different data types and sizes. But greater video !!! ❤

[@uuu12343]

Pointers are like your fingers, fingers that are pointing at something (aliased "x"), that object "x" is stored in an area known as the memory address A pointer holds the memory address containing variable "x" To obtain the value located in the memory address of variable x pointed by the pointer, use `&ptr` Now, a pointer to a pointer holds the memory address containing the original pointer object pointing to variable "x" above Repeat to keep getting the memory address of everything the previous level is pointing

[@noobyfromhell]

Pro tip: if you have to use raw function pointers in C++, use the new style of typedefs: using Func = void(int, int); Func* x; - much more readable IMO. In general, avoid declarations that sandwich the identifier in the middle like the plague.

[@ICHIGOZIN]

1:12 this is a criminal way to use malloc

[@pierrotarat]

"Great, you've explained these quite well. Now use them."

[@Herio7]

The biggest problem with pointers is batshit insane C syntax.

[@lapikolko2]

What is the extension called that shows addresses and memory in the console?

[@Rose-ec6he]

I wish this was a joke of some kind, then I wouldn't want to cry

[@john.darksoul]

I REFUSE to understand this syntax.

[@faisalwahid-u7b]

Hahahaha

[@JLSXMK8]

3:29 --> See line 15 (3:21) for further clarification. In short, line 25 is saying that you want to first dereference the pointer, followed by selecting the function at index 0 for that pointer; then you have to de-reference that index (the array itself decays to a pointer containing the addresses of each function) in order to call the function you want from that double pointer. i.e., createFunctionPointerArray() returns "& -> {&add, &subtract}". You're making an embedded function library, I guess you could say, that the variable references, and you have to dereference all those pointers to access the function you want. Easy to understand?

[@TheAnxiousOwl]

I'm assuming the brackets that aren't used or don't have anything in them are just placeholders for new nested variables and code to be added in the future?... Either that or code that already exists with those brackets in mind and are connected to similar code.

[@vayr880]

im new to the concept of pointers and memory allocation, since i just started learning c++ a few days ago. decided to spend an hour or so looking at this after learning the basics of pointers until i feel like i understood enough about how it all ties together, i guess i learned more about it but now i have a painful headache...

[@ChrisgammaDE]

1:10 I'm pretty sure you can also use sizeof() directly instead of calculating manually

[@szirsp]

2:46 And how do you use this? How do you implement such a function?

[@SetOfAllSets]

you should explain that arrays in C are actually just pointers with a fancy hat on.

[@ThousandsOfPk]

Interfaces are a fine abstraction from function pointer madness

[@tommasopattaro1329]

I lasted 2 minutes, then my brain exploded, and i am a programmer...