为什么c ++没有默认初始化[重复](why c++ doesn't have default initialization [duplicate])

为什么c ++没有默认初始化[重复](why c++ doesn't have default initialization [duplicate])

这个问题在这里已有答案：

为什么默认情况下没有使用NULL初始化指针？ 15个答案

例如，声明引用而不将其分配给某些东西会产生编译器错误，例如。 int &refVar; 但这并不适用于指针。 我得到了c ++跳过一些理智的默认功能，如跳过绑定检查等以获得速度，但这个理论不适合指针变量。

为什么有人会声明一个指针变量而不是将它初始化为什么？ 为什么不到NULL / 0甚至nullptr ？ 大多数静态分析器实际上指出了这个问题，但是可能的原因是定义这种未定义的行为？ 这不是一个很好的错误来源吗？

This question already has an answer here:

Why aren't pointers initialized with NULL by default? 15 answers

For example declaring a reference without assigning it to something gives a compiler error eg. int &refVar; but this doesn't holds true for pointers. I get that c++ skips some sane default features like skipping bound checks etc to gain speed but this theory dosen't fits well with pointer variables.

Why would someone declare a pointer variable and not initialize it to something? And why not to NULL/0 or even nullptr? Most static analyzers actually point out this problem, but what could be the possible reason to define this undefined behaviour? Isn't this a great source of bugs?

最满意答案

我认为很可能是由于初始化这些变量可能产生的开销。 对于一个变量，这可能不是一个大问题，但想象一下在堆栈上分配的数组。

I think most likely it is due to possible overhead of initializing these variables. This might not be such a big problem for one variable, but imagine arrays allocated on the stack.