Take the address of a one-past-the-end array element via subscript: legal by the C++ Standard or not?

by

Yes, it’s legal. From the C99 draft standard:

§6.5.2.1, paragraph 2:

A postfix expression followed by an expression in square brackets [] is a subscripted
designation of an element of an array object. The definition of the subscript operator []
is that E1[E2] is identical to (*((E1)+(E2))). Because of the conversion rules that
apply to the binary + operator, if E1 is an array object (equivalently, a pointer to the
initial element of an array object) and E2 is an integer, E1[E2] designates the E2-th
element of E1 (counting from zero).

§6.5.3.2, paragraph 3 (emphasis mine):

The unary & operator yields the address of its operand. If the operand has type ‘‘type’’,
the result has type ‘‘pointer to type’’. If the operand is the result of a unary * operator,
neither that operator nor the & operator is evaluated and the result is as if both were
omitted, except that the constraints on the operators still apply and the result is not an
lvalue. Similarly, if the operand is the result of a [] operator, neither the & operator nor the unary * that is implied by the [] is evaluated and the result is as if the & operator
were removed and the [] operator were changed to a + operator. Otherwise, the result is
a pointer to the object or function designated by its operand.

§6.5.6, paragraph 8:

When an expression that has integer type is added to or subtracted from a pointer, the
result has the type of the pointer operand. If the pointer operand points to an element of
an array object, and the array is large enough, the result points to an element offset from
the original element such that the difference of the subscripts of the resulting and original
array elements equals the integer expression. In other words, if the expression P points to
the i-th element of an array object, the expressions (P)+N (equivalently, N+(P)) and
(P)-N (where N has the value n) point to, respectively, the i+n-th and i−n-th elements of
the array object, provided they exist. Moreover, if the expression P points to the last
element of an array object, the expression (P)+1 points one past the last element of the
array object, and if the expression Q points one past the last element of an array object,
the expression (Q)-1 points to the last element of the array object. If both the pointer
operand and the result point to elements of the same array object, or one past the last
element of the array object, the evaluation shall not produce an overflow; otherwise, the
behavior is undefined. If the result points one past the last element of the array object, it
shall not be used as the operand of a unary * operator that is evaluated.

Note that the standard explicitly allows pointers to point one element past the end of the array, provided that they are not dereferenced. By 6.5.2.1 and 6.5.3.2, the expression &array[5] is equivalent to &*(array + 5), which is equivalent to (array+5), which points one past the end of the array. This does not result in a dereference (by 6.5.3.2), so it is legal.

More Related Contents:

  1. Where exactly does C++ standard say dereferencing an uninitialized pointer is undefined behavior?
  2. Is `long` guaranteed to be at least 32 bits?
  3. Can we apply content not explicitly cited from the normative references to the C++ standard?
  4. Using paragraphs 8.5.3p4 and p5 in the C++11 Standard, how do I prove that the snippet below doesn’t compile?
  5. Accessing inactive union member and undefined behavior?
  6. Optimizing away a “while(1);” in C++0x
  7. trap representation
  8. Is `reinterpret_cast`ing between hardware SIMD vector pointer and the corresponding type an undefined behavior?
  9. Does printf(“%x”,1) invoke undefined behavior?
  10. What made i = i++ + 1; legal in C++17?
  11. c++ access static members using null pointer
  12. Standard-layout and tail padding
  13. Deducing first template argument with other template parameters defaulted
  14. Get pointer to object from pointer to some member
  15. Understanding the example on lvalue-to-rvalue conversion
  16. Is it legal to declare a constexpr initializer_list object?
  17. Self-initialization of a static constexpr variable, is it well-formed?
  18. Are notes and examples in the core language specification of the C++ Standard non-normative?
  19. Defining a variable in the condition part of an if-statement?
  20. What is the purpose of a declaration like int (x); or int (x) = 10;
  21. Can branches with undefined behavior be assumed unreachable and optimized as dead code?
  22. Does C++11 allow dollar signs in identifiers?
  23. Is stl vector concurrent read thread-safe?
  24. What happens when a function that returns an object ends without a return statement
  25. Can I legally reinterpret_cast between layout-compatible standard-layout types?
  26. Why do (only) some compilers use the same address for identical string literals?
  27. Calling delete on NULL pointers – C++03 vs C++11
  28. C++ operator % guarantees
  29. Can I use the result of a C++17 captureless lambda constexpr conversion operator as a function pointer template non-type argument?
  30. Is char default-promoted?

Leave a Comment