When Declaring a Reference to an Array of Ints, why must it be a reference to a const-pointer?

Question

Note: I am using the g++ compiler (which is I hear is pretty good and supposed to be pretty close to the standard).

---

Let's say you have declared an array of ints:

int a[3] = { 4, 5, 6 };

Now let's say you really want to declare a reference to that array (nevermind why, other than the Bjarne says the language supports it).

Case 1 -- If you try:

int*& ra = a;

then the compiler balks and says:

"invalid initialization of non-const reference of type `int*&' from a temporary of type `int*'"  

First things first, why is 'a' a temporary variable (i.e. doesn't it have a place in memory?)...

Anyway, fine, whenever I see a non-const error, I try to throw in a const...

Case 2 -- if you try:

int*const&rca = a;  //wish I knew where the spaces should go (but my other post asking about this sort of protocol got a negative rank while many of the answers got ranked highly -- aha! there are stupid questions!) 

Then everything is cool, it compiles, and you get a reference to the array.

Case 3 -- Now here is another thing that will compile:

int* justSomeIntPointer = a;  //LINE 1
int*& rpa = justSomeIntPointer;  //LINE 2

This also gives you a reference to the original array.

So here is my question: At what point does the name of a statically declared array become a const-pointer? I seem to remember that the name of an array of ints is also a pointer-to-int, but I don't remember it ever being a const-pointer-to-int...

It seems like Case 1 fails because the reference declared (ra) is not to a const-pointer, which may mean that 'a' was already a const-pointer-to-int to begin with.

It seems like Case 2 works because the reference declared (rca) is already a const-pointer-to-int.

Case 3 also works, which is neat, but why? At what point does the assumed pointer-to-int (i.e. the array name 'a') become a const-pointer? Does it happen when you assign it to an int* (LINE 1), or does it happen when you assign that int* to a int*& (LINE 2)?

Hope this makes sense. Thanks.

Answer 1

int*& ra = a;

int* is a pointer type, not an array type. So that's why it won't bind to a, which has type int[3].

int* const& ra = a;

works, because it is equivalent to

int* const& ra = (int*)a;

That is, a temporary pointer is conceptually created on the right-hand side of the assignment and this temporary is then bound to ra. So in the end, this is no better than:

int* ra = a;

where ra is in fact a pointer to the first element of the array, not a reference to the array.

Declaring a reference to an array the easy way:

typedef int array_type[3];
array_type& ra = a;

The not-as-easy way:

int (&ra)[3] = a;

The C++11-easy way:

auto& ra = a;

---

At what point does the name of a statically declared array become a const-pointer? I seem to remember that the name of an array of ints is also a pointer-to-int, but I don't remember it ever being a const-pointer-to-int...

This is the right question to ask! If you understand when array-to-pointer decay happens, then you're safe. Simply put there are two things to consider:

• decay happens when any kind of 'copying' is attempted (because C doesn't allow arrays to be copied directly)
• decay is a kind of conversion and can happen anytime a conversion is allowed: when the types don't match

The first kind typically happen with templates. So given template<typename T> pass_by_value(T);, then pass_by_value(a) will actually pass an int*, because the array of type int[3] can't be copied in.

As for the second one, you've already seen it in action: this happens in your second case when int* const& can't bind to int[3], but can bind to a temporary int*, so the conversion happens.

Answer 2

The word "array" in C++ is spelled with brackets []. If you want to declare a something-array-something in C++, you have to have brackets in your declaration. If you write an asterisk * instead, you will get a pointer. Pointers and arrays are two different things.

This is a reference to an array:

int (&ra) [3] = a;