Rvalue Reference Passing with Const and Non-Const References
In C , passing rvalues by const reference is permissible while doing so with non-const references raises errors. Consider the following code snippet:
<code class="cpp">void display(const int& a) { cout << a; }</code>
This code will compile successfully and work correctly when called with an rvalue, such as a literal:
<code class="cpp">display(5); // OK</code>
However, if the const were removed from the reference parameter:
<code class="cpp">void display(int& a) { cout << a; }</code>
Calling this function with an rvalue will result in a compilation error. This raises the question: why is passing rvalues by const reference allowed, but not by non-const reference?
Prolonging Temporary Variable Lifetime
The answer lies in how C handles temporary values created as a result of expressions. When an rvalue is used, a temporary object is created to hold its value. Normally, such temporary objects are destroyed immediately after their use. However, when bound to a const reference, they are granted an extended lifetime until the end of the containing scope.
Benefits of Const References
Using const references to pass rvalues offers the following benefits:
The above is the detailed content of Here are some title options based on the content, formatted as questions: * Why Can Rvalues Be Passed by Const Reference but Not Non-Const Reference in C ? * C Rvalue References: When is Passing. For more information, please follow other related articles on the PHP Chinese website!