Re: Why you should never use a const& parameter to initialize a const& member variable!
On 3 Feb., 15:49, "Martin B." <0xCDCDC...@gmx.at> wrote:
myFAQ 0815 - Why you should never use a const& parameter to initialize a
const& member variable!
Today, once again, I shot myself in the foot. I thought I'd share this.
Rule: You must never use a const-reference parameter to a constructor to
initialize a const-reference member-variable.
Reason: const& parameters bind to temporaries. You do not want to track
temporaries!
Solution: Use a const* parameter
If you want a const& member variable in a class to reference something,
then it has to be initialized in the ctor. But you must not use a const&
parameter to the ctor to initialize the member, because this parameter
would bind to a temporary and then you would be tracking the temporary
instead of the original value.
Example demonstrating the issue:
--------------------------------
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class Bad {
int const& tracker_;
public:
explicit Bad(int const& to_track)
: tracker_(to_track)
{ }
void print() {
cout << "bad tracker_ is: " << tracker_ << endl;
}
};
class Better {
int const& tracker_;
public:
explicit Better(int const* to_track)
: tracker_(*to_track)
{ }
void print() {
cout << "better tracker_ is: " << tracker_ << endl;
}
};
int f() {
static int i = 1;
i += 5;
return i;
}
int main()
{
int t = 100;
char c = 32;
Bad a1( f() ); // compiles: bad
// Better b1( &(f()) ); - compiler error: good
Bad a2( c ); // compiles: bad
// Better b2( &c ); - compiler error: good
Bad a3( t );
Better b3( &t );
t = 166;
c = 64;
t = f();
a1.print(); // May crash or just print 6 (or whatever)
// b1.print();
a2.print(); // May crash or just print 32
// b2.print();
a3.print(); // OK
b3.print(); // OK
return 0;}
--------------------------------
While I agree that this *can* cause a problem,
I still use references to const in examples
like yours - in C++03 you have to take care here.
I say so, because there are numerous places,
where this could cause problems - just remember
a call of the std::min or std::max functions.
If the compared objects are really large one's
I don't want to copy them, therefore I may want
to get the result by reference (to const) as well.
In C++0x there is a nice way of preventing the
problem you mention: Just add an overload of the
corresponding function which accepts an rvalue
reference of the type and define the function
as deleted:
class Bad {
int const& tracker_;
public:
explicit Bad(int const&&) = delete;
explicit Bad(int const& to_track)
: tracker_(to_track)
{ }
[...]
};
HTH & Greetings from Bremen,
Daniel Kr?gler
--
[ See http://www.gotw.ca/resources/clcm.htm for info about ]
[ comp.lang.c++.moderated. First time posters: Do this! ]