I don't even see a delete there, lol.
I guess it's fine to start using naked new early, even though you don't want to use it as a general rule. It's easier to understand than make_unique and make_shared
>p[1] = &i
This bit is what's causing the error I think. Try gettong rid of the &. Just a stab in the dark, I haven't thought about it much.
The unary & operator takes a pointer of, not a reference to
I think she is expecting a legitimate output on the answer though. She never gives "error"/no output answers on her quizes.
To understand pointers you need to understand the basic memory model of a computer.
Basically, a very wide array of bytes starting from index 0 to over 9000.
A pointer is simply an address (offset) in memory.
Operator& (unary) gives you the address of a thing (usually a variable).
Operator* (unary) is the reverse operation, gives the value of the stuff stored at a given address.
I understand that much. It's just when I have so many things pointing to so many other things I get lost really quickly.
It's probably just an oversight. It's easy to make these kinds of mistakes when you're not really thinking about what you're doing.
Bjarne himself recommends to start directly with make_unique and either unique_ptr or simply the "auto" keyword
that's what I'm thinking. Do you have any idea what the intended result was supposed to be?
Well shit, I'm BTFO.
change p[1] = &i to p[1] = i and see if it compiles. If it does, run it.
This is when you get your paper and pencil and draw that shit out