Mixing pointers and references in function definition in C++ [closed]

Question

I have a function that has two instances of classes as arguments:

void cookPasta(const Tomato& tomato, const Meat* meat)
{
    if (meat != nullptr)
        cookPastaWithMeat(tomato, *meat);
    else
        cookPastaWithoutMeat(tomato);
}

As the function shows, an instance of Tomato is always required, whereas Meat is optional and a nullptr can be passed instead. I do this to allow the cookPasta function to be called even if the user has never declared an instance of the Meat class.

Is it bad practice to mix references and pointers in the function signature?

Answer 1

The one thing you lose with this approach is the possibility to pass in a temporary Meat, as its address can't be taken.

Why not use overloading, by simply renaming cookPastaWithMeat and cookPastaWithoutMeat ?

void cookPasta(const Tomato& tomato, const Meat& meat);
void cookPasta(const Tomato& tomato);

Answer 2

Your Practice is good

• You've used const keyword.
• Passing reference

• But, 2nd parameter pointer can be little better using optional parameter feature of C++. check out here.

  void cookPasta(const Tomato& tomato, Meat* meat = nullptr)
  {
      if (meat != nullptr)
          cookPastaWithMeat(tomato, *meat);
      else
          cookPastaWithoutMeat(tomato);
  }
  

Now, Call the same function in both way.

cookPasta(tomato); // meat will default to nullptr
cookPasta(tomato, meat);