Unsafe casting behavior
why it is geting stuch at p->show();#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B {
public:
virtual void show() { cout << "B::show\n"; }
};
class C {
public:
void show() { cout << "C::show\n"; }
};
class D : public B, public C
{
void show() { cout << "D::show\n"; }
// Can we redefine show() here?
};
int main() {
D d1;
//d1.show();
B* p = (B*)(C*) & d1;
cout << &d1 << ":" << p << ":" << (C*)&d1 << ":" << (B*)(C*)&d1<<":" << (B*)&d1<<":"<<(C*)(B*)&d1
<< '\n';
p->show();
You're encountering undefined behavior and the program may hang or crash at `p->show();` because
of this cast:
cpp
B* p = (B*)(C*) &d1;
🔍 Let's break it down:
You have a diamond-like multiple inheritance scenario without a common base, and you’re performing
illegal and unsafe casts.
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 1/10
cpp
class B { public: virtual void show(); };
class C { public: void show(); }; // Non-virtual
class D : public B, public C { void show(); };
`D` inherits from both `B` and `C`.
Both `B` and `C` have a method named `show()`, but:
`B::show()` is virtual.
`C::show()` is not virtual.
`D::show()` overrides neither, because:
It hides both due to name conflict, but does not override `B::show()` unless it's explicitly
marked `override` (but it still overrides virtually if names match and `B::show()` is virtual).
🔥 Dangerous cast:
cpp
B* p = (B*)(C*) &d1;
Here's what this cast does:
1. `(C*)&d1` — cast `D*` to `C*`:
Since `C` is a base class, this cast is valid.
But now the pointer points to the `C` subobject of `d1`.
2. `(B*)(C*)&d1` — cast `C*` to `B*`:
❌ This is not valid.
`C` and `B` are unrelated types — they do not share any inheritance.
This cast breaks object layout assumptions.
🧠 Why `p->show()` causes issues:
When you call `p->show();`, the compiler uses the vtable associated with `B` (since `B::show()` is
virtual). But your pointer `p` is pointing to memory that isn't actually a `B` subobject anymore — it's
pointing to the `C` subobject of `D`.
So, you're effectively dereferencing a `vtable` that isn't valid, or the pointer isn't correctly aligned,
causing:
Segmentation fault
Crash
Garbage output
Infinite loop/hang — due to corrupted vtable or control flow
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 2/10
✅ Correct approach:
If you just want to call `B::show()` via `B*`, do this:
cpp
B* p = &d1;
p->show(); // Calls D::show() if D overrides B::show() (it does)
If you want to call `C::show()`:
cpp
C* cp = &d1;
cp->show(); // Calls C::show(), since it's not virtual
If you want to resolve ambiguity due to multiple inheritance:
cpp
d1.B::show(); // Calls B::show()
d1.C::show(); // Calls C::show()
💡 Summary:
You're casting from unrelated types (`C*` to `B*`), which is undefined behavior.
The program is probably accessing an invalid vtable, leading to a hang or crash.
Avoid such casts unless you are 100% sure the memory layout and type relationships are valid.
Prefer using `dynamic_cast` (when polymorphism exists) or avoid unnecessary cast chains.
Would you like a diagram of the object layout to visualize how these subobjects are arranged in
memory?
give this type dry that seems not work but work and maybe not and without virtual
Sure! Here's a "tricky dry run" C++ example with multiple inheritance and function name hiding (but
without `virtual`) that seems like it shouldn't work — or might behave unpredictably — but
actually works correctly according to C++ rules:
🧪 Example: Function hiding with multiple inheritance (no `virtual`)
cpp
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class A {
public:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 3/10
void greet() { cout << "Hello from A\n"; }
};
class B {
public:
void greet() { cout << "Hello from B\n"; }
};
class C : public A, public B {
public:
void greet() { cout << "Hello from C\n"; }
};
int main() {
C obj;
//obj.greet(); // OK, calls C::greet
obj.A::greet(); // Legal, calls A::greet
obj.B::greet(); // Legal, calls B::greet
A* pa = &obj; // OK, A is a base class
B* pb = &obj; // OK, B is a base class
pa->greet(); // Calls A::greet
pb->greet(); // Calls B::greet
p2->greet();
❗
// Dangerous-looking but works:
A* p2 = (A*)(B*)&obj; // Seems risky but actually works due to object layout rules
// Calls A::greet
return 0;
}
🔍 Why this seems suspicious:
`C` inherits from both `A` and `B`, and both define `greet()` non-virtual.
`C` defines its own `greet()`, hiding both base versions.
The cast `(A*)(B*)&obj` feels wrong (like your earlier code), because you're going through `B*` to
get to `A*`, and they are unrelated — but here, it works.
⚙️ Why it does work here:
You're still dealing with valid subobjects.
`C` actually contains both `A` and `B` subobjects.
The memory layout in this specific case lets the cast land on a valid `A` subobject again.
⚠️ But be careful:
This is technically undefined behavior in C++ because you're converting between unrelated base
classes without `dynamic_cast`.
It just happens to work on most compilers (e.g., GCC, Clang, MSVC) due to layout, but is not
portable or safe.
✅ Takeaway:
If you want a tricky C++ example that looks broken but works, this is great for:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 4/10
Teaching multiple inheritance
Explaining object layout
Showing function hiding
Triggering discussions on "why undefined behavior might seem defined"
Would you like one more example that uses ambiguity in inheritance or method overloading with
casting?
explain why p->show() run print #include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B {
public:
virtual void show() { cout << "B::show\n"; }
};
class C
{
public:
virtual void show() { cout << "C::show\n"; }
};
class D
{
public:
virtual void print()
{
cout << "Print D\n";
}
void show() { cout << "D::show\n"; }
// Can we redefine show() here?
};
int main() {
D d1;
//d1.show();
B* p = (B*)(C*) & d1;
cout << &d1 << ":" << p << ":" << (C*)&d1 << ":" << (B*)(C*)&d1<<":" << (B*)&d1<<":"<<(C*)(B*)&d1
<< '\n';
p->show();
You're asking why `p->show()` runs and prints `B::show`, even though class `D` is not derived from
either `B` or `C`, and this cast:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 5/10
cpp
B* p = (B*)(C*) &d1;
looks suspicious — and indeed, it is!
⚠️ TL;DR: It prints because of undefined behavior — but coincidentally, the
`B::show`
object layout and the vtable pointer in memory allow the program to reach
`B::show()`. This is a dangerous and non-portable trick.
Let's walk through this step by step.
🧱 Code Structure:
Class Definitions:
cpp
class B {
public:
virtual void show() { cout << "B::show\n"; }
};
class C {
public:
virtual void show() { cout << "C::show\n"; }
};
class D {
public:
virtual void print() { cout << "Print D\n"; }
void show() { cout << "D::show\n"; }
};
`B` and `C` each have a virtual `show()`.
`D` has a non-virtual `show()`, and a virtual `print()`.
`D` does not inherit from `B` or `C` — so they are completely unrelated types.
🧨 The cast:
cpp
B* p = (B*)(C*) &d1;
Here's what happens:
1. `(C*)&d1`:
Casts the address of `d1` (type `D*`) to `C*`.
This is invalid — `D` is not derived from `C`.
You're telling the compiler: "treat this memory as if it's a `C` object."
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 6/10
This is undefined behavior.
2. `(B*)(C*)&d1`:
Now you're casting a `C*` to a `B*`, even though `C` and `B` are unrelated.
Again, undefined behavior — you are lying to the compiler about the actual type.
Despite all that, the compiler allows it because C++ allows reinterpret casts, but the behavior at
runtime is not guaranteed.
🔧 So why does `p->show()` print `B::show`?
Because:
`B::show()` is virtual.
Virtual functions are called using a vtable stored at the beginning of the object memory layout.
Even though `d1` is not a `B`, you're interpreting its first few bytes as a `B` object.
`d1` has a vtable pointer (because it has a virtual function `print()`).
So when `p->show()` is called:
It looks up the first pointer in `d1` assuming it's `B`’s vtable.
It finds a function — which just happens to match the layout of `B`’s vtable — and jumps to it.
That function is `B::show`, because the compiler sees `p` as a `B*` and calls the first slot of
the vtable as if it’s `B::show`.
This works by coincidence, not design. You’re calling a method from an unrelated class using a
reinterpret cast. You’re lucky it doesn’t crash.
📛 What makes this code invalid (and dangerous)?
`D` is not derived from `C`.
`C` is not derived from `B`.
You are casting between unrelated polymorphic types.
The behavior is undefined by the C++ standard.
The output (`B::show`) is a coincidence of:
Vtable layout,
Matching function signatures,
Memory alignment.
✅ Proper, safe version (if you wanted polymorphism):
cpp
class B {
public:
virtual void show() { cout << "B::show\n"; }
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 7/10
};
class D : public B {
public:
void show() override { cout << "D::show\n"; }
};
int main() {
B* p = new D;
p->show(); // prints D::show
}
🧠 Summary:
Behavior Explanation
`p->show()` runs Because you're calling a virtual function using a pointer.
It prints `B::show` Because memory layout happens to point to `B::show()`'s address.
Safe or correct? No — this is undefined behavior.
Why doesn't it crash? The vtable pointer in `d1` is valid, and layout matches by chance.
Would you like a memory diagram or visualization to show why the vtable tricks the program?
correct me if i am wrong or maybe right that if all have virtual function than they have vtable and
vptr when i do (C*)&d1; i give vptr of d1 to C and updates c vptr pointing location than futhert or
(C*)&d1 updaate d1 vptr?
You're thinking in the right direction — great question. Let me clarify the correct understanding step by
step, especially about what happens with vtable pointers (`vptr`) during such casts.
✅ Summary Answer (Corrected Understanding):
❌ Casting like does not update any vtable pointer ( ).
✅ Instead, it treats the existing memory ( ) as if it's a object, without changing any
`(C*)&d1` `vptr`
`d1` `C`
contents of `d1`.
🔍 Deeper Explanation
✅ When a class has at least one virtual function, it has:
A vtable: A table of function pointers.
A vptr: A hidden pointer inside the object that points to the vtable.
The `vptr` is usually stored at the start of the object in memory.
💡 In your case:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 8/10
cpp
class D {
public:
virtual void print(); // Virtual => D has a vptr
void show(); // Non-virtual
};
D d1;
`d1` has a vptr pointing to D’s vtable (containing `print()`).
🔄 What happens in `(C*)&d1;`
You reinterpret the bits of `d1` as if it were a `C` object.
No constructor of `C` is called. So:
The vptr is NOT changed.
The object still has D's vtable pointer inside.
Now, when you do `((C*)&d1)->show()`, the compiler assumes:
"`d1` is a C object."
So, call the first virtual function in the vtable as if it's `C::show()`.
But the vptr actually still points to `D`'s vtable (because it's a D object), not to a C vtable.
💥 That's why it's Undefined Behavior:
You're telling the compiler "`d1` is a `C`", but it:
Has the wrong vtable,
Doesn't have `C`'s memory layout,
And might call the wrong function.
In your case, the function it jumps to happens to match `B::show()` — but that's pure coincidence.
🧠 Important Rule:
C++ type casting (like `(C*)&d1`) never changes the vptr or updates any runtime data
inside the object.
It only tells the compiler: “trust me, this object is now a `C*`.”
The compiler then uses `C`'s vtable layout to make virtual calls — and if the object isn’t really a `C`, this
becomes undefined behavior.
🔎 Optional Memory Visualization
If `D` has a memory layout like this:
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 9/10
pgsql
+-----------------+
| vptr -> D vtable| ← Points to vtable of class D
+-----------------+
| show() body |
+-----------------+
And you cast to `C*`, the compiler assumes:
diff
+-----------------+
| vptr -> C vtable| ← But it's still pointing to D’s vtable!
+-----------------+
| C's data |
+-----------------+
So when you call a virtual method like `show()`, the compiler uses the vptr — and now you're using a
vptr that doesn't belong to `C`, even though the compiler thinks it does.
✅ Final Takeaway:
Statement Correct? Explanation
"All classes with virtual functions have vtable and vptr" ✅ Yes Any class with at least one virtual function
gets a vptr.
"(C*)&d1 updates D's vptr to C's" ❌ No Casts don’t change memory. The vptr still
points to D’s vtable.
"Calling virtual functions through a wrongly casted
pointer can lead to wrong behavior"
✅ Yes This is undefined behavior — and
dangerous.
Would you like a visual diagram of memory + vtable layout or a safe example to contrast this?
Do you like this personality?
Printed using ChatGPT to PDF, powered by PDFCrowd HTML to PDF API. 10/10
