void Foo(const Bar* bar);void Foo(const Bar& bar);C++ function params: pointer-to-const vs. reference-to-const
Author
I've got a quick (hopefully) question. :)
Are there any semantic differences between the following code segments, and if so what would be the reasons to prefer one over the other?
If the parameter can refer to a null pointer then you should use a pointer, otherwise use a reference.
You can pass an unnamed temporary into a function taking a const reference, but not a pointer. This can be very convenient.
I difference is:
const Bar* bar is a pointer to a const Bar
but you can do the following (eg. by mistake)
const Bar A,B;
const Bar* ptrA = &A
ptrA = &B
so you could chang what the pointer points to in the function scope. Which of course you can not with a reference.
So execpt for what rip-off said the following will behave the same:
const Bar* const bar
const Bar& bar
const Bar* bar is a pointer to a const Bar
but you can do the following (eg. by mistake)
const Bar A,B;
const Bar* ptrA = &A
ptrA = &B
so you could chang what the pointer points to in the function scope. Which of course you can not with a reference.
So execpt for what rip-off said the following will behave the same:
const Bar* const bar
const Bar& bar
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
