std::cout << variable << "\n";
Late addition:
When I asked this question I seemed to think that newline '\n'
flushed the buffer. Now I know that it depends.
By default std::cin
is tied to the old C stdin
FILE*
stream, and std::cout
is tied to stdout
. The flushing on newline comes from this tying. By default stdout
, if connected to a terminal, is line-buffered. That means a new line will flush its buffers. So when printing a newline using std::cout
, that will lead to stdout
being flushed.
If stdout
is not connected to a terminal (for example the output has been redirected or is piped), or if the tie between std::cout
and stdout
is broken, then newlines will not flush anything.
–
–
–
Actually, '\n'
should be the default. Unless you want to also explicitly flush the stream (and when and why would you want to do that?), there is no need to use std::endl
at all.1
Of course, many books and tutorials use std::endl
as the default. That is unfortunate and might lead to serious performance bugs.
I suppose there's little difference between using '\n'
or using "\n"
, but the latter is an array of (two) characters, which has to be printed character by character, for which a loop has to be set up, which is more complex than outputting a single character. Of course, when doing IO this rarely matters, but if in doubt, when you want to output one character literal, output a character literal, rather than a whole string literal.
A nice side-effect of doing so is that you communicate in your code that you intended to output only a single character, and not just accidentally did this.
1 Note that std::cout
is tied to std::cin
by default, which leads to std::cout
being flushed before any input operation, so that any prompt will be printed before the user has to input something.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
They do different things. "\n"
Outputs a newline (in the appropriate platform-specific representation, so it generates a "\r\n"
on Windows), but std::endl
does the same and flushes the stream. Usually, you don't need to flush the stream immediately and it'll just cost you performance, so for the most part there's no reason to use std::endl
.
Edit: I worded my answer poorly, which may have lead people to believe that I thought "\n" actually printed a null character. This is of course wrong :)
Edit 2: Having looked at a C++ reference, char
s are passed by reference anyway, so there's no difference there. The only difference is that the cstring will have to be searched for a delimiting character. The below isn't correct due to this fact.
'\n'
would be ever so slightly more efficient than "\n"
, because the latter also contains a null character on the end, which means you're sending a char*
to operator<<()
(usually 4 bytes on a 32-bit system) as opposed to a single byte for a char
.
In practice, this is borderline irrelevant. Personally, I follow the convention that Vladimir outlined.*
–
–
–
–
std::cout << variable << std::endl;
std::endl
output a newline, but it also flushes the output stream. In other words, same effect as
std::cout << variable << '\n'; // output newline
std::cout.flush(); // then flush
std::cout << variable << '\n';
'\n'
output a newline for a char,
hence ostream& operator<< (ostream& os, char c);
will be used.
std::cout << variable << "\n";
"\n"
is a const char[2]
, so ostream& operator<< (ostream& os, const char* s);
will be used. We can imagine, this function will contain a loop, we might argue is overkill to just print out a newline.
std::endl
flushes the stream. When this something you want to happen -- e.g. because you expect your output to be made visible to the user in a timely fashion -- you should use std::endl
instead of writing '\n'
to the stream (whether as an isolated character or part of a string).
Sometimes, you can get away without explicitly flushing the stream yourself; e.g. in a linux environment, if cout
is synchronized with STDOUT
(this is the default) and is writing to a terminal, then by default, the stream will be line buffered and will automatically flush every time you write a new line.
However, it is risky to rely on this behavior. e.g. in the same linux environment, if you decide to run your program with stdout
being redirected to a file or piped to another process, then by default, the stream will be block buffered instead.
Similarly, if you later decide to turn off synchronization with stdio (e.g. for efficiency), then implementations will tend to use iostream
's buffering mechanisms, which doesn't have a line buffering mode.
I have seen much wasted productivity due to this mistake; if output should be visible when it is written, then you should either use std::endl
explicitly (or use std::flush
or std::ostream::flush
, but I usually find std::endl
more convenient), or do something else that ensures flushing happens often enough, such as configuring stdout
to be line buffered (assuming that's adequate).