Why the use of const in a method with no parameters? [duplicate] - c++

This question already has answers here:
Meaning of 'const' last in a function declaration of a class?
(12 answers)
What is meant with "const" at end of function declaration? [duplicate]
(6 answers)
Closed 8 years ago.
why is the purpose of "const" in that case?
std::string List::reqClubName() const
{
return m_Club;
}
Thanks

Banning the modification of members is not the only reason to qualify a member function as const. Whether you want to modify members or not, you can only call a member function on an object through a const context if the member function is marked const:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
struct List
{
std::string reqClubName()
{
return m_Club;
}
private:
std::string m_Club;
};
int main()
{
const List l;
std::cout << l.reqClubName();
// ^ illegal: `l` is `const` but, `List::reqClubName` is not
}
Neither the language nor the compiler care that reqClubName doesn't try to modify the object anyway; your program will not compile.
Because of this, a const suffix should be your default approach unless you do need to modify a data member.

The const after a member function says that the function does not modify member data in the class it is a part of.

Related

Passing a member function to a base class constructor results in "invalid use of non-static function..." [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How can I pass a member function where a free function is expected?
(9 answers)
how to pass a non static-member function as a callback?
(8 answers)
Pass Member Function as Parameter to other Member Function (C++ 11 <function>) [duplicate]
(2 answers)
Closed 4 months ago.
I need to change the prototype of a function pointer of a class. So, I was hoping inheriting it and doing the following would work, but it doesn't ("invalid use of non-static member function 'void B::myIntCallback(unsigned int)"):
class A {
public:
typedef void (*intCallback_t)(unsigned int myInt);
A(intCallback_t intCallback) {}
};
class B : A {
public:
typedef void (*charCallback_t)(unsigned char myChar);
B(charCallback_t charCallback) : A(this->myIntCallback) {
charCallback_ = charCallback;
}
private:
charCallback_t charCallback_;
void myIntCallback(unsigned int myInt) {
charCallback_((unsigned char)myInt);
}
};
Does anybody know how I can solve this? I can't change class A.
You are trying to pass a member function (B::myIntCallback) to a function pointer argument. Since the member function needs an object to be called on, his would require some kind of capturing, e.g. a lambda capturing this or an std::bind expression. Unfortunately, neither is possible with a plain function pointer, see also Passing capturing lambda as function pointer.
If possible, you may want to consider changing the class A to accept either a std::function or a template argument as the type of the callback. See also Should I use std::function or a function pointer in C++?.

Can anybody explain a typical scenario where Const function is necessary? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Meaning of 'const' last in a function declaration of a class?
(12 answers)
Closed 2 years ago.
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
class Test {
int value;
public:
Test(int v = 0) {value = v;}
// We get compiler error if we add a line like "value = 100;"
// in this function.
int getValue() const {return value;}
};
int main() {
Test t(20);
cout<<t.getValue();
return 0;
}
Can anybody explain a typical practical scenario where Const function is necessary?
The const member functions are the functions which are declared as constant in the program. The object called by these functions cannot be modified. It is recommended to use const keyword so that accidental changes to object are avoided.
A const member function can be called by any type of object. Non-const functions can be called by non-const objects only.
https://www.tutorialspoint.com/const-member-functions-in-cplusplus

C++ Struct internal declaration confusion? [duplicate]

This question already has an answer here:
Factory Pattern: typedef Class *(createClassFunction)(void)
(1 answer)
Closed 8 years ago.
I've come across a declaration inside a C++ Struct{..} that I've never seen before.
Can anyone tell me what it means;
struct DerivedMesh {
char cd_flag;
void (*calcNormals)(DerivedMesh *dm); // <-- What is this?
It kind of looks like it's dereferencing a pointer called calcNormals, but that's all I can make out.
This is a C syntax for declaring function pointers.
In this particular example, DerivedMesh will have a member calcNormals that is a pointer to a function accepting single argument of type DerivedMesh*. It can be called like an ordinary function:
void foo(DerivedMesh* dm) { ... }
DerivedMesh dm;;
// Init members and set calcNormals to actual function
dm.cf_flag = whatever;
dm.calcNormals = foo;
dm.calcNormals(&dm); // calls foo
This
void (*calcNormals)(DerivedMesh *dm);
is class data member definition with name calcNormals that has type of pointer to function of type void( DerivedMesh * )

Why does this const member function modifies the static member data? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Why can a const member function modify a static data member?
(4 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
I have the following line of code from Eckel-Thining in C++
Class Obj{
static int i,j;
public:
void f() const {cout<<i++<<endl;}
void f() const {cout<<i++<<endl;}
};
int Obj::i=47;
int Obj::j=11;
Now it's written in Ecekl for const member functions that by declaring a member function const , we tell the compiler to refrain from modifying a class data. I understand that in some specific cases like mutable const and by explicitly casting away constness of this pointer , we can do away with that but here neither of the two are happening and i++ and j++ working fine. Why is it so?
const is only for object (this pointer is const), modifying static members is allowed.
In a const member function, the object for which the function is called is accessed through a const access path; therefore, a const member function shall not modify the object and its non-static data members.
source:someone cites c++ standard
As you can see, static data member is not protected by const as per c++ standard.

What does const mean following a function/method signature? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Meaning of 'const' last in a function declaration of a class?
(12 answers)
Closed 5 years ago.
According to MSDN: "When following a member function's parameter list, the const keyword specifies that the function does not modify the object for which it is invoked."
Could someone clarify this a bit? Does it mean that the function cannot modify any of the object's members?
bool AnalogClockPlugin::isInitialized() const
{
return initialized;
}
It means that the method do not modify member variables (except for the members declared as mutable), so it can be called on constant instances of the class.
class A
{
public:
int foo() { return 42; }
int bar() const { return 42; }
};
void test(const A& a)
{
// Will fail
a.foo();
// Will work
a.bar();
}
Note also, that while the member function cannot modify member variables not marked as mutable, if the member variables are pointers, the member function may not be able to modify the pointer value (i.e. the address to which the pointer points to), but it can modify what the pointer points to (the actual memory region).
So for example:
class C
{
public:
void member() const
{
p = 0; // This is not allowed; you are modifying the member variable
// This is allowed; the member variable is still the same, but what it points to is different (and can be changed)
*p = 0;
}
private:
int *p;
};
The compiler won’t allow a const member function to change *this or to
invoke a non-const member function for this object
As answered by #delroth it means that the member function doesn't modify any memeber variable except those declared as mutable. You can see a good FAQ about const correctness in C++ here