Is `reinterpret_cast` actually good for anything?

user_827280 0
Viewed 730

I recently learned that it is Undefined Behavior to reinterpret a POD as a different POD by reinterpret_casting its address. So I'm just wondering what a potential use-case of reinterpret_cast might be, if it can't be used for what its name suggests?

c++17 type-punning reinterpret-cast casting c++
3 Answers

There are two situations in which I’ve used reinterpret_cast:

  1. To cast to and from char* for the purpose of serialisation or when talking to a legacy API. In this case the cast from char* to an object pointer is still strictly speaking UB (even though done very frequently). And you don’t actually need reinterpret_cast here — you could use memcpy instead, but the cast might under specific circumstances avoid a copy (but in situations where reinterpreting the bytes is valid in the first place, memcpy usually doesn’t generate any redundant copies either, the compiler is smart enough for that).

  2. To cast pointers from/to std::uintptr_t to serialise them across a legacy API or to perform some non-pointer arithmetic on them. This is definitely an odd beast and doesn’t happen frequently (even in low-level code) but consider the situation where one wants to exploit the fact that pointers on a given platform don’t use the most significant bits, and these bits can thus be used to store some bit flags. Garbage collector implementations occasionally do this. The lower bits of a pointer can sometimes also be used, if the programmer knows that the pointer will always be aligned e.g. at an 8 byte boundary (so the lowest three bits must be 0).

But to be honest I can’t remember the last concrete, legitimate situation where I’ve actually used reinterpret_cast. It’s definitely many years ago.

user_19680

Conforming implementations of C and C++ are allowed to extend the semantics of C or C++ by behaving meaningfully even in cases where the Standards would not require them to do so. Implementations that do so will may be more suitable for a wider range of tasks than implementations that do not. In many cases, it is useful to have consistent syntax to specify constructs which will be processed meaningfully and consistently by implementations that are designed to be suitable for low-level programming tasks, even if implementations which are not designed to be suitable for such purposes would process them nonsensically.

user_3637510

One very frequent use case is when you're working with C library functions that take an opaque void * that gets forwarded to a callback function. Using reinterpret_cast on both sides of the fence, so to speak, keeps everything proper.

user_39433120
Related