Imagine following declaration:And a second one:What are the possible performance differences between these two if any? And is there any danger associated with any of these solutions?
a.ha.cb.cWhy the compiler or linker is not complaining about two extern declarations with different type and same identifier (x), and they are silently linked together?
I am looking for ways to visualize the effects of #define's - For example that code not seen by the compiler is shown in a different color.
Give that you're calling move in main() to invoke the rvalue reference methods, is it necessary in lines A & B & C to repeat an additional call to move()? You already have the rvalue reference, so is it doing anything different in those lines with vs without?
Supposing we have:Many introductions to C++ (like this one) suggest that the rvalues a+i and &a[i] are interchangeable. I naively believed this for several decades, until I recently stumbled upon the following text (here) quoted from [dcl.ref]:
What is the difference betweenandIntuitively, I would never use the second version but I am not sure there much difference. It feels to me that the second line is simply a default constructor followed by a move assignment operator but I am really not sure.
I have some confusion for contents about variable names in K & R C. Original text as below:At least the first 31 characters of an internal name are significant. For function names and external variables, the number may be less than 31, because external names may be used by assemblers...
I'm playing around with a few things to understand how copy constructors work. But I can't make sense of why the copy constructor is called twice for the creation of x2. I would have assumed it would be called once when the return value of createX() is copied into x2....
I am trying to remove duplicates from an vector by using an unordered_set. but my design creates an unordered_set that doesn't maintain the ordering correctly. in this example the "z" is not at the end. What am I doing wrong? thank you in advance.
Let's say I have several objects declared locally that I want to iterate over using range-based for syntax. This seems to work well, however, it appears that to put the local objects into the initializer_list, a copy is performed. This is bad news for objects like std::shared_ptr for which (as...