const reference to object returned by value

From:

rwf_20 <rfrenz@gmail.com>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:57:05 -0000

Message-ID:

<1188410225.659955.59270@o80g2000hse.googlegroups.com>

Hi,

I'm looking at the differences between:

const NonTrivialObject& obj =
functionThatReturnsANonTrivialObjectByValue();

and:

const NonTrivialObject obj =
functionThatReturnsANonTrivialObjectByValue();

My question is, can I expect these two lines to be any different?

I assumed that the object returned by the function becomes a
temporary. In the first line, I thought that the const reference
would be bound to that temporary, causing the temporary to hang around
until the reference dies.

In the second line, I assumed that the temporary returned from the
function is then copied into 'obj'. Hence, the first line saves a
copy. My testing has proven this completely wrong. See the following
code and results. Is there anything in the standard that could
clarify this, or is this completely compiler-specific?

The code below compiled in gcc 3.4.4 outputs:
Start.
Copy!
A
B
C
Copy!
D
E
F

Microsoft CL 14.00.5 (from VS 8.0) outputs:
Start.
Copy!
A
B
Copy!
C
Copy!
D
E
Copy!
F

Code:

#include <iostream>
class testClass {
public:
testClass() { }

testClass(const testClass& t) { std::cerr << "Copy!\n"; }
};

class ObjectFactory {
public:
ObjectFactory() { }
testClass getResidentObject() const {
   return m_object;
}

testClass getLocalTempObject() {
   return testClass();
}

testClass getLocalObject() {
   testClass t;
   return t;
}

private:
testClass m_object;
};

int main() {
ObjectFactory of;
std::cerr << "Start.\n";

const testClass& t1 = of.getResidentObject();
std::cerr << "A\n";

const testClass& t2 = of.getLocalTempObject();
std::cerr << "B\n";

const testClass& t3 = of.getLocalObject();
std::cerr << "C\n";

const testClass t4 = of.getResidentObject();
std::cerr << "D\n";

const testClass t5 = of.getLocalTempObject();
std::cerr << "E\n";

const testClass t6 = of.getLocalObject();
std::cerr << "F\n";

return 0;
}

Any insight would be appreciated. Basically, I'm trying to decide if
it's ever worth using a const reference to refer to something returned
from a function.

Ryan