Welcome to ShenZhenJia Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share
menu search
person
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

Categories

Is this a valid way to create an assignment operator with members that are references?

#include <new>

struct A
{
    int &ref;
    A(int &Ref) : ref(Ref) { }
    A(const A &second) : ref(second.ref) { }
    A &operator =(const A &second)
    {
        if(this == &second)
            return *this;
        this->~A();
        new(this) A(second);
        return *this;
    }
}

It seems to compile and run fine, but with c++ tendency to surface undefined behavior when least expected, and all the people that say its impossible, I think there is some gotcha I missed. Did I miss anything?

See Question&Answers more detail:os

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
thumb_up_alt 0 like thumb_down_alt 0 dislike
220 views
Welcome To Ask or Share your Answers For Others

1 Answer

It's syntactically correct. If the placement new throws, however, you end up with an object you can't destruct. Not to mention the disaster if someone derives from your class. Just don't do it.

The solution is simple: if the class needs to support assignment, don't use any reference members. I have a lot of classes which take reference arguments, but store them as pointers, just so the class can support assignment. Something like:

struct A
{
    int* myRef;
    A( int& ref ) : myRef( &ref ) {}
    // ...
};

与恶龙缠斗过久,自身亦成为恶龙;凝视深渊过久,深渊将回以凝视…
thumb_up_alt 0 like thumb_down_alt 0 dislike
Welcome to ShenZhenJia Knowledge Sharing Community for programmer and developer-Open, Learning and Share

548k questions

547k answers

4 comments

86.3k users

...