cbegin/cend 背后的原因是什么?
我想知道为什么在 C++11 中引入了 cbegin
和 cend
?
I wonder why cbegin
and cend
were introduced in C++11?
在哪些情况下调用这些方法与 begin
和 end
的 const 重载有区别?
What are cases when calling these methods makes a difference from const overloads of begin
and end
?
推荐答案
很简单.假设我有一个向量:
It's quite simple. Say I have a vector:
std::vector<int> vec;
我用一些数据填充它.然后我想得到一些迭代器.也许让他们四处走动.也许到 std::for_each
:
I fill it with some data. Then I want to get some iterators to it. Maybe pass them around. Maybe to std::for_each
:
std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), SomeFunctor());
在 C++03 中,SomeFunctor
可以自由地修改它获得的参数.当然,SomeFunctor
可以按值或按const&
获取其参数,但没有办法确保 这样做.并非没有做这样愚蠢的事情:
In C++03, SomeFunctor
was free to be able to modify the parameter it gets. Sure, SomeFunctor
could take its parameter by value or by const&
, but there's no way to ensure that it does. Not without doing something silly like this:
const std::vector<int> &vec_ref = vec;
std::for_each(vec_ref.begin(), vec_ref.end(), SomeFunctor());
现在,我们介??绍cbegin/cend
:
std::for_each(vec.cbegin(), vec.cend(), SomeFunctor());
现在,我们有句法保证,即 SomeFunctor
不能修改向量的元素(当然,没有 const-cast).我们明确地得到 const_iterator
,因此 SomeFunctor::operator()
将被 const int &
调用.如果它的参数是int &
,C++会报编译错误.
Now, we have syntactic assurances that SomeFunctor
cannot modify the elements of the vector (without a const-cast, of course). We explicitly get const_iterator
s, and therefore SomeFunctor::operator()
will be called with const int &
. If it takes it's parameters as int &
, C++ will issue a compiler error.
C++17 对此问题有更优雅的解决方案:std::as_const
.好吧,至少在使用基于范围的 for
时它很优雅:
C++17 has a more elegant solution to this problem: std::as_const
. Well, at least it's elegant when using range-based for
:
for(auto &item : std::as_const(vec))
这只是返回一个 const&
给它提供的对象.
This simply returns a const&
to the object it is provided.
相关文章