What Does T&& (Double Ampersand) Mean in C++11

What does T&& (double ampersand) mean in C++11?

It declares an rvalue reference (standards proposal doc).

Here's an introduction to rvalue references.

Here's a fantastic in-depth look at rvalue references by one of Microsoft's standard library developers.

CAUTION: the linked article on MSDN ("Rvalue References: C++0x Features in VC10, Part 2") is a very clear introduction to Rvalue references, but makes statements about Rvalue references that were once true in the draft C++11 standard, but are not true for the final one! Specifically, it says at various points that rvalue references can bind to lvalues, which was once true, but was changed.(e.g. int x; int &&rrx = x; no longer compiles in GCC) – drewbarbs Jul 13 '14 at 16:12

The biggest difference between a C++03 reference (now called an lvalue reference in C++11) is that it can bind to an rvalue like a temporary without having to be const. Thus, this syntax is now legal:

T&& r = T();

rvalue references primarily provide for the following:

Move semantics. A move constructor and move assignment operator can now be defined that takes an rvalue reference instead of the usual const-lvalue reference. A move functions like a copy, except it is not obliged to keep the source unchanged; in fact, it usually modifies the source such that it no longer owns the moved resources. This is great for eliminating extraneous copies, especially in standard library implementations.

For example, a copy constructor might look like this:

foo(foo const& other)
{
    this->length = other.length;
    this->ptr = new int[other.length];
    copy(other.ptr, other.ptr + other.length, this->ptr);
}

If this constructor were passed a temporary, the copy would be unnecessary because we know the temporary will just be destroyed; why not make use of the resources the temporary already allocated? In C++03, there's no way to prevent the copy as we cannot determine whether we were passed a temporary. In C++11, we can overload a move constructor:

foo(foo&& other)
{
   this->length = other.length;
   this->ptr = other.ptr;
   other.length = 0;
   other.ptr = nullptr;
}

Notice the big difference here: the move constructor actually modifies its argument. This would effectively "move" the temporary into the object being constructed, thereby eliminating the unnecessary copy.

The move constructor would be used for temporaries and for non-const lvalue references that are explicitly converted to rvalue references using the std::move function (it just performs the conversion). The following code both invoke the move constructor for f1 and f2:

foo f1((foo())); // Move a temporary into f1; temporary becomes "empty"
foo f2 = std::move(f1); // Move f1 into f2; f1 is now "empty"

Perfect forwarding. rvalue references allow us to properly forward arguments for templated functions. Take for example this factory function:

template <typename T, typename A1>
std::unique_ptr<T> factory(A1& a1)
{
    return std::unique_ptr<T>(new T(a1));
}

If we called factory<foo>(5), the argument will be deduced to be int&, which will not bind to a literal 5, even if foo's constructor takes an int. Well, we could instead use A1 const&, but what if foo takes the constructor argument by non-const reference? To make a truly generic factory function, we would have to overload factory on A1& and on A1 const&. That might be fine if factory takes 1 parameter type, but each additional parameter type would multiply the necessary overload set by 2. That's very quickly unmaintainable.

rvalue references fix this problem by allowing the standard library to define a std::forward function that can properly forward lvalue/rvalue references. For more information about how std::forward works, see this excellent answer.

This enables us to define the factory function like this:

template <typename T, typename A1>
std::unique_ptr<T> factory(A1&& a1)
{
    return std::unique_ptr<T>(new T(std::forward<A1>(a1)));
}

Now the argument's rvalue/lvalue-ness is preserved when passed to T's constructor. That means that if factory is called with an rvalue, T's constructor is called with an rvalue. If factory is called with an lvalue, T's constructor is called with an lvalue. The improved factory function works because of one special rule:

When the function parameter type is of
the form T&& where T is a template
parameter, and the function argument
is an lvalue of type A, the type A& is
used for template argument deduction.

Thus, we can use factory like so:

auto p1 = factory<foo>(foo()); // calls foo(foo&&)
auto p2 = factory<foo>(*p1);   // calls foo(foo const&)

Important rvalue reference properties:

  • For overload resolution, lvalues prefer binding to lvalue references and rvalues prefer binding to rvalue references. Hence why temporaries prefer invoking a move constructor / move assignment operator over a copy constructor / assignment operator.
  • rvalue references will implicitly bind to rvalues and to temporaries that are the result of an implicit conversion. i.e. float f = 0f; int&& i = f; is well formed because float is implicitly convertible to int; the reference would be to a temporary that is the result of the conversion.
  • Named rvalue references are lvalues. Unnamed rvalue references are rvalues. This is important to understand why the std::move call is necessary in: foo&& r = foo(); foo f = std::move(r);

C++ Double Address Operator? (&&)

This is C++11 code. In C++11, the && token can be used to mean an "rvalue reference".

What does the double ampersand return type mean? [duplicate]

From: http://www.stroustrup.com/C++11FAQ.html#rval

The && indicates an "rvalue reference". An rvalue reference can bind to an rvalue (but not to an lvalue):

X a;
X f();
X& r1 = a;      // bind r1 to a (an lvalue)
X& r2 = f();    // error: f() is an rvalue; can't bind

X&& rr1 = f();  // fine: bind rr1 to temporary
X&& rr2 = a;    // error: bind a is an lvalue

What is the name of type T && in C++? [duplicate]

It depends on the context. When T is known type then T&& is an rvalue reference. When T is a template parameter then T&& is a universal reference.

What does T&& (double ampersand) mean in C++11?

It declares an rvalue reference (standards proposal doc).

Here's an introduction to rvalue references.

Here's a fantastic in-depth look at rvalue references by one of Microsoft's standard library developers.

CAUTION: the linked article on MSDN ("Rvalue References: C++0x Features in VC10, Part 2") is a very clear introduction to Rvalue references, but makes statements about Rvalue references that were once true in the draft C++11 standard, but are not true for the final one! Specifically, it says at various points that rvalue references can bind to lvalues, which was once true, but was changed.(e.g. int x; int &&rrx = x; no longer compiles in GCC) – drewbarbs Jul 13 '14 at 16:12

The biggest difference between a C++03 reference (now called an lvalue reference in C++11) is that it can bind to an rvalue like a temporary without having to be const. Thus, this syntax is now legal:

T&& r = T();

rvalue references primarily provide for the following:

Move semantics. A move constructor and move assignment operator can now be defined that takes an rvalue reference instead of the usual const-lvalue reference. A move functions like a copy, except it is not obliged to keep the source unchanged; in fact, it usually modifies the source such that it no longer owns the moved resources. This is great for eliminating extraneous copies, especially in standard library implementations.

For example, a copy constructor might look like this:

foo(foo const& other)
{
    this->length = other.length;
    this->ptr = new int[other.length];
    copy(other.ptr, other.ptr + other.length, this->ptr);
}

If this constructor were passed a temporary, the copy would be unnecessary because we know the temporary will just be destroyed; why not make use of the resources the temporary already allocated? In C++03, there's no way to prevent the copy as we cannot determine whether we were passed a temporary. In C++11, we can overload a move constructor:

foo(foo&& other)
{
   this->length = other.length;
   this->ptr = other.ptr;
   other.length = 0;
   other.ptr = nullptr;
}

Notice the big difference here: the move constructor actually modifies its argument. This would effectively "move" the temporary into the object being constructed, thereby eliminating the unnecessary copy.

The move constructor would be used for temporaries and for non-const lvalue references that are explicitly converted to rvalue references using the std::move function (it just performs the conversion). The following code both invoke the move constructor for f1 and f2:

foo f1((foo())); // Move a temporary into f1; temporary becomes "empty"
foo f2 = std::move(f1); // Move f1 into f2; f1 is now "empty"

Perfect forwarding. rvalue references allow us to properly forward arguments for templated functions. Take for example this factory function:

template <typename T, typename A1>
std::unique_ptr<T> factory(A1& a1)
{
    return std::unique_ptr<T>(new T(a1));
}

If we called factory<foo>(5), the argument will be deduced to be int&, which will not bind to a literal 5, even if foo's constructor takes an int. Well, we could instead use A1 const&, but what if foo takes the constructor argument by non-const reference? To make a truly generic factory function, we would have to overload factory on A1& and on A1 const&. That might be fine if factory takes 1 parameter type, but each additional parameter type would multiply the necessary overload set by 2. That's very quickly unmaintainable.

rvalue references fix this problem by allowing the standard library to define a std::forward function that can properly forward lvalue/rvalue references. For more information about how std::forward works, see this excellent answer.

This enables us to define the factory function like this:

template <typename T, typename A1>
std::unique_ptr<T> factory(A1&& a1)
{
    return std::unique_ptr<T>(new T(std::forward<A1>(a1)));
}

Now the argument's rvalue/lvalue-ness is preserved when passed to T's constructor. That means that if factory is called with an rvalue, T's constructor is called with an rvalue. If factory is called with an lvalue, T's constructor is called with an lvalue. The improved factory function works because of one special rule:

When the function parameter type is of
the form T&& where T is a template
parameter, and the function argument
is an lvalue of type A, the type A& is
used for template argument deduction.

Thus, we can use factory like so:

auto p1 = factory<foo>(foo()); // calls foo(foo&&)
auto p2 = factory<foo>(*p1);   // calls foo(foo const&)

Important rvalue reference properties:

  • For overload resolution, lvalues prefer binding to lvalue references and rvalues prefer binding to rvalue references. Hence why temporaries prefer invoking a move constructor / move assignment operator over a copy constructor / assignment operator.
  • rvalue references will implicitly bind to rvalues and to temporaries that are the result of an implicit conversion. i.e. float f = 0f; int&& i = f; is well formed because float is implicitly convertible to int; the reference would be to a temporary that is the result of the conversion.
  • Named rvalue references are lvalues. Unnamed rvalue references are rvalues. This is important to understand why the std::move call is necessary in: foo&& r = foo(); foo f = std::move(r);

What does && mean with a parameter type in C++? [duplicate]

It is called an rvalue reference, and it is new in C++11. It binds to temporaries without making a copy.

What does double ampersand do in bpf filter?

Even if this were C++, &&ALU_ADD_X and so on are expressions, not types, so the && couldn't indicate an rvalue reference.

If you scroll down a bit, you will find that all the ALU_* things, and default_label, are labels.

You will also find a goto *jumptable[op];, where op is a number.

GCC has an extension where you can take the "address" of a label as a value and use it as the target for goto.

&& is the operator that produces such a value.

A shorter example:

void example() 
{
    void* where = test_stuff() ? &&here : &&there;
    goto *where;
    here:
        do_something();
        return;   
    there:
        do_something_else();
}

There's more information in the documentation (which is pretty much impossible to find unless you know what you're looking for).

What does the & (ampersand) at the end of member function signature mean?

Ref-qualifiers - introduced in C++11

Ref-qualifiers is not C++17 feature (looking at the tag of the question), but was a feature introduced in C++11. 

struct Foo
{
  void bar() const &  { std::cout << "const lvalue Foo\n"; }
  void bar()       &  { std::cout << "lvalue Foo\n"; }
  void bar() const && { std::cout << "const rvalue Foo\n"; }
  void bar()       && { std::cout << "rvalue Foo\n"; }
};

const Foo&& getFoo() { return std::move(Foo()); }

int main()
{
  const Foo c_foo;
  Foo foo;

  c_foo.bar();            // const lvalue Foo
  foo.bar();              // lvalue Foo
  getFoo().bar();         // [prvalue] const rvalue Foo
  Foo().bar();            // [prvalue] rvalue Foo

  // xvalues bind to rvalue references, and overload resolution
  // favours selecting the rvalue ref-qualifier overloads.
  std::move(c_foo).bar(); // [xvalue] const rvalue Foo
  std::move(foo).bar();   // [xvalue] rvalue Foo
}

Note that an rvalue may be used to initialize a const lvalue reference (and in so expanding the lifetime of the object identified by the rvalue), meaning that if we remove the rvalue ref-qualifier overloads from the example above, then the rvalue value categories in the example will all favour the remaining const & overload:

struct Foo
{
  void bar() const & { std::cout << "const lvalue Foo\n"; }
  void bar()       & { std::cout << "lvalue Foo\n"; }
};

const Foo&& getFoo() { return std::move(Foo()); }

int main()
{
  const Foo c_foo;
  Foo foo;

  // For all rvalue value categories overload resolution
  // now selects the 'const &' overload, as an rvalue may
  // be used to initialize a const lvalue reference.
  c_foo.bar();            // const lvalue Foo
  foo.bar();              // lvalue Foo
  getFoo().bar();         // const lvalue Foo
  Foo().bar();            // const lvalue Foo
  std::move(c_foo).bar(); // const lvalue Foo
  std::move(foo).bar();   // const lvalue Foo
}

See e.g. the following blog post for for a brief introduction:

  • Andrzej's C++ blog - Ref-qualifiers

rvalues cannot invoke non-const & overloads

To possibly explain the intent of your recollected quote from the CppCon talk,

"... that the only true way of overloading operator= ..."

we visit [over.match.funcs]/1, /4 & /5 [emphasis mine]:

/1 The subclauses of [over.match.funcs] describe the set of candidate functions and the argument list submitted to overload
resolution in each context in which overload resolution is used. ...

/4 For non-static member functions, the type of the implicit object parameter is

  • (4.1) — “lvalue reference to cv X” for functions declared without a ref-qualifier or with the & ref-qualifier

  • (4.2) — “rvalue reference to cv X” for functions declared with the && ref-qualifier


where X is the class of which the function is a member and cv is the
cv-qualification on the member function declaration. ...

/5 ... For non-static member functions declared without a ref-qualifier, an additional rule applies:

  • (5.1) — even if the implicit object parameter is not const-qualified, an rvalue can be bound to the parameter as long as
    in all other respects the argument can be converted to the type of the
    implicit object parameter.     [ Note: The fact that such an argument is
    an rvalue does not affect the ranking of implicit conversion
    sequences. — end note ]

From /5 above, the following overload (where the explicit & ref-qualifier has been omitted)

struct test
{
    test& operator=(const test&) { return *this }
}

allows assigning values to r-values, e.g.

int main()
{
    test t1;
    t1 = test(); // assign to l-value
    test() = t1; // assign to r-value
}

However, if we explicitly declare the overload with the & ref-qualifier, [over.match.funcs]/5.1 does not apply, and as long we do not supply an overload declared with the && ref-qualifier, r-value assignment will not be allowed.

struct test
{
    test& operator=(const test&) & { return *this; }
};

int main()
{
    test t1;
    t1 = test(); // assign to l-value
    test() = t1; // error [clang]: error: no viable overloaded '='
}

I won't place any opinion as to whether explicitly including the & ref-qualifier when declaring custom assignment operator overloads is "the only true way of overload operator=", but would I dare to speculate, then I would guess that the intent behind such a statement is the exclusion of to-r-value assignment.

As a properly designed assignment operator should arguably never be const (const T& operator=(const T&) const & would not make much sense), and as an rvalue may not be used to initialize a non-const lvalue reference, a set of overloads for operator= for a given type T that contain only T& operator=(const T&) & will never proviade a viable overload that can be invoked from a T object identified to be of an rvalue value category.

What does && mean at the end of a function signature (after the closing parenthesis)? [duplicate]

This is a ref-value qualifier. Here is a basic example:

// t.cpp
#include <iostream>

struct test{
  void f() &{ std::cout << "lvalue object\n"; }
  void f() &&{ std::cout << "rvalue object\n"; }
};

int main(){
  test t;
  t.f(); // lvalue
  test().f(); // rvalue
}

Output:

$ clang++ -std=c++0x -stdlib=libc++ -Wall -pedantic t.cpp
$ ./a.out
lvalue object
rvalue object

Taken from here.


Related Topics

Why Doesn't Polymorphism Work Without Pointers/References

Why Use Static_Cast≪Int≫(X) Instead of (Int)X

Initialization of All Elements of an Array to One Default Value in C++

How to Make My Custom Type to Work With "Range-Based For Loops"

Why Should the Implementation and the Declaration of a Template Class Be in the Same Header File

Is Cout Synchronized/Thread-Safe

How Does 'Void_T' Work

How to Call ::Std::Make_Shared on a Class With Only Protected or Private Constructors

Concise Explanation of Reference Collapsing Rules Requested: (1) A& & -≫ A& , (2) A& && -≫ A& , (3) A&& & -≫ A& , and (4) A&& && -≫ A&&

How to Execute a Functor or a Lambda in a Given Thread in Qt, Gcd-Style

Why Can In-Class Initializers Only Use = or {}

Is There a Standard Sign Function (Signum, Sgn) in C/C++

How to Expand a Tuple into Variadic Template Function'S Arguments

Using Std Namespace

Get Current Time in Milliseconds, or Hh:Mm:Ss:Mmm Format

Correct Way of Passing Pointer to Another Thread

What How to Do With a Moved-From Object

Why Are C Character Literals Ints Instead of Chars


Leave a reply



Submit