When creating local variables, is it correct to use (const) auto&
or auto
?
e.g.:
SomeClass object; const auto result = object.SomeMethod();
or const auto& result = object.SomeMethod();
Where SomeMethod() returns a non-primitive value - maybe another user-defined type. My understanding is that const auto& result
is correct since the result returned by SomeMethod() would call the copy constructor for the returned type. Please correct me if I am wrong.
What about for primitive types? I assume const auto sum = 1 + 2;
is correct.
Does this also apply to range based for loops?
for(const auto& object : objects)
auto: This is the default storage class for all the variables declared inside a function or a block. Hence, the keyword auto is rarely used while writing programs in C language. Auto variables can be only accessed within the block/function they have been declared and not outside them (which defines their scope).
Auto is a storage class/ keyword in C Programming language which is used to declare a local variable. A local variable is a variable which is accessed only within a function, memory is allocated to the variable automatically on entering the function and is freed on leaving the function.
attribute declaration (C++11) empty declaration. Specifies that the type of the variable that is being declared will be automatically deduced from its initializer. For functions, specifies that the return type is a trailing return type or will be deduced from its return statements (since C++14).
auto acts as a placeholder for a type to be deduced from the initializer expression of a variable. With auto type deduction enabled, you no longer need to specify a type while declaring a variable. Instead, the compiler deduces the type of an auto variable from the type of its initializer expression.
auto
and auto &&
cover most of the cases:
Use auto
when you need a local copy. This will never produce a reference. The copy (or move) constructor must exist, but it might not get called, due to the copy elision optimization.
Use auto &&
when you don't care if the object is local or not. Technically, this will always produce a reference, but if the initializer is a temporary (e.g., the function returns by value), it will behave essentially like your own local object.
Also, auto &&
doesn't guarantee that the object will be modifiable, either. Given a const
object or reference, it will deduce const
. However, modifiability is often assumed, given the specific context.
auto &
and auto const &
are a little more specific:
auto &
guarantees that you are sharing the variable with something else. It is always a reference and never to a temporary.
auto const &
is like auto &&
, but provides read-only access.
What about for primitive/non-primitive types?
There is no difference.
Does this also apply to range based for loops?
Yes. Applying the above principles,
auto &&
for the ability to modify and discard values of the sequence within the loop. (That is, unless the container provides a read-only view, such as std::initializer_list
, in which case it will be effectively an auto const &
.)auto &
to modify the values of the sequence in a meaningful way.auto const &
for read-only access.auto
to work with (modifiable) copies.You also mention auto const
with no reference. This works, but it's not very commonly used because there is seldom an advantage to read-only access to something that you already own.
Yes, it is correct to use auto
and auto&
for local variables. When getting the return type of a function, it is also correct to use auto&
. This applies for range based for loops as well.
General rules for using auto
are:
auto x
when you want to work with copies. auto &x
when you want to work with original items and may modify them. auto const &x
when you want to work with original items and will not modify them.You can read more about the auto specifier here.
If you love us? You can donate to us via Paypal or buy me a coffee so we can maintain and grow! Thank you!
Donate Us With