Re: References vs Pointers

On 03/07/08 09:58, Jon Earle wrote:
>
> So, the reference, as received by a function, looks and acts like a
> parameter that was passed by value, but actually refers, or points to, the
> original value?  In which case, I would need to treat it as if it were not
> a pointer but a local parameter and apply the address-of operator to get
> the original memory location?

Yes, you need to treat it like the rvalue it is.  There is no guarantee a 
reference parameter is implemented as a pointer:  it's quite possible (in 
fact in the example case more than likely) that it's just a register and the 
value gets copied in before the function call and copied out after the 
function call.  

> (Lions in PEI... new movie idea, perhaps?  Lazy coder's sloppy code
> unleashes some horrible chain of events upon an unsuspecting population?)

According to the C++ standard, if you invoke undefined behaviour, anything can 
happen.  Anything.  A C++ programmer must avoid any missteps for this reason.  
Your next typo could open a rift in the space-time continuum and set upon the 
world some dark unspeakable lurking horror.  Those kinds of problems can be 
difficult to debug.
-- 
OCLUG general discussion list
[email protected]
http://oclug.on.ca/mailman/listinfo/oclug