Re: References to temporaries and function-calls

From:

"Victor Bazarov" <v.Abazarov@comAcast.net>

Newsgroups:

comp.lang.c++

Date:

Thu, 15 Feb 2007 11:18:01 -0500

Message-ID:

<er213q$c3b$1@news.datemas.de>

Sylvester Hesp wrote:

"Gavin Deane" <deane_gavin@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1171547463.242146.302480@s48g2000cws.googlegroups.com...
On 15 Feb, 13:16, "Erik Wikstr?m" <eri...@student.chalmers.se> wrote:

int main() {
bar(foo());
foo& a_reference = foo();
}

...both statements have the same problem. They both try and bind a
temporary to an non-const reference.

Also keep in mind that for both versions the copy ctor of foo has to
be accessible if the reference were to be const. And this, in fact,
does work
int main()
{
foo& a_reference(foo());

It's a declaration of a function. Of course it "does work".

}

Even without accessible copy ctor. These things strike me as odd. In
what situations a copy is needed to bind the temporary to a (const)
reference? And if [ foo& a = foo(); ] is not allowed, why is [ foo&
a(foo()); ] allowed? And why does the latter _not_ require a copy
ctor?
- Sylvester

V
--
Please remove capital 'A's when replying by e-mail
I do not respond to top-posted replies, please don't ask