Is the practice of returning a C++ reference variable evil?(返回 C++ 引用变量的做法是否邪恶?)
问题描述
This is a little subjective I think; I'm not sure if the opinion will be unanimous (I've seen a lot of code snippets where references are returned).
According to a comment toward this question I just asked, regarding initializing references, returning a reference can be evil because, [as I understand] it makes it easier to miss deleting it, which can lead to memory leaks.
This worries me, as I have followed examples (unless I'm imagining things) and done this in a fair few places... Have I misunderstood? Is it evil? If so, just how evil?
I feel that because of my mixed bag of pointers and references, combined with the fact that I'm new to C++, and total confusion over what to use when, my applications must be memory leak hell...
Also, I understand that using smart/shared pointers is generally accepted as the best way to avoid memory leaks.
In general, returning a reference is perfectly normal and happens all the time.
If you mean:
int& getInt() {
int i;
return i; // DON'T DO THIS.
}
That is all sorts of evil. The stack-allocated i will go away and you are referring to nothing. This is also evil:
int& getInt() {
int* i = new int;
return *i; // DON'T DO THIS.
}
Because now the client has to eventually do the strange:
int& myInt = getInt(); // note the &, we cannot lose this reference!
delete &myInt; // must delete...totally weird and evil
int oops = getInt();
delete &oops; // undefined behavior, we're wrongly deleting a copy, not the original
Note that rvalue references are still just references, so all the evil applications remain the same.
If you want to allocate something that lives beyond the scope of the function, use a smart pointer (or in general, a container):
std::unique_ptr<int> getInt() {
return std::make_unique<int>(0);
}
And now the client stores a smart pointer:
std::unique_ptr<int> x = getInt();
References are also okay for accessing things where you know the lifetime is being kept open on a higher-level, e.g.:
struct immutableint {
immutableint(int i) : i_(i) {}
const int& get() const { return i_; }
private:
int i_;
};
Here we know it's okay to return a reference to i_ because whatever is calling us manages the lifetime of the class instance, so i_ will live at least that long.
And of course, there's nothing wrong with just:
int getInt() {
return 0;
}
If the lifetime should be left up to the caller, and you're just computing the value.
Summary: it's okay to return a reference if the lifetime of the object won't end after the call.
这篇关于返回 C++ 引用变量的做法是否邪恶?的文章就介绍到这了,希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助,也希望大家多多支持编程学习网!
本文标题为:返回 C++ 引用变量的做法是否邪恶?
基础教程推荐
- 我有静态或动态 boost 库吗? 2021-01-01
- 静态库、静态链接动态库和动态链接动态库的 .lib 文件里面是什么? 2021-01-01
- 如何在 C++ 中初始化静态常量成员? 2022-01-01
- 如何检查GTK+3.0中的小部件类型? 2022-11-30
- 在 C++ 中计算滚动/移动平均值 2021-01-01
- 常量变量在标题中不起作用 2021-01-01
- C++结构和函数声明。为什么它不能编译? 2022-11-07
- 如何通过C程序打开命令提示符Cmd 2022-12-09
- 如何将 std::pair 的排序 std::list 转换为 std::map 2022-01-01
- 这个宏可以转换成函数吗? 2022-01-01
