构造函数是否也有隐式 this 参数
我正在学习 C++ 中的类,并且知道非静态成员函数具有隐式 this 参数。我的第一个问题是,构造函数是否也有一个隐式 this 参数,就像非静态成员函数一样。请注意,我并不是在问我们是否可以在 ctor 内部使用 this
,因为我已经知道我们可以在 ctor 内部使用 this
。
接下来,我知道在类 X
的 const
限定非静态成员函数中,this
的类型是 const X *。对于非静态成员函数(不带 const 限定),
this
的类型为 X*
。同样,在 ctor 内部,this
的类型始终为 X*
。更深层次的问题来了。
我们知道,当我们调用一个非静态成员函数(例如obj.func()
)时,名为obj
的对象的地址会隐式传递给隐式成员函数。 func
方法的此参数。因此,这解释了“在非静态成员函数的情况下 this
来自何处”。
现在,让我们将同样的事情应用于构造函数。例如,假设我们使用默认 ctor 创建一个 X
类的对象,如下所示:
X x; //does the default ctor also have an implicit this parameter to which the address of x is passed?
我的第二个问题是:同样的事情也会发生在 ctor 上吗?就像,x
的地址被传递给默认构造函数的隐式参数。我目前的理解是,ctors 没有隐式的 this 参数。因此,当我们编写 X x;
时,x
的地址不会作为参数传递,因为该对象尚未创建,因此传递它的地址是没有意义的。地址。但从标准中我们知道,在 ctor 内部我们可以使用 this
指针。所以我的第二个问题本质上是,如果 ctor 没有隐式 this
参数,那么语句 中的
从何而来?我们知道,在 C++ 中使用任何名称(例如变量名称)之前,我们必须对该名称进行声明。那么 this
在哪里? this->p = 0;this
的声明在哪里?在 ctor 的情况下,编译器是否隐式声明 this
?我的意思是,对于非静态成员函数,我可以理解它们将 this
声明为隐式 this 参数,但是在构造函数中会发生什么? 在 ctors 内部,我们如何能够在没有声明的情况下使用名称 this
?
struct Name
{
private:
int p = 0;
int k = 0;
void func() //func is a non-static member function and so have an implicit this parameter
{
this->k = 0; // the "this" here comes from implicit this parameter
}
Name()
{
this->p = 0; //where does the "this" comes from here since ctor don't have implicit this parameter
}
};
我的第三个问题是,这就是隐式的概念this 参数是实现细节,还是标准规定非静态成员函数将具有隐式 this 参数。
摘要
ctor 是否有隐式的 this 参数?第一个问题也可以表述为“医生也有隐式对象参数?”。
标准规定我们可以在构造函数中使用
this
。但是这个this
从哪里来呢?例如,在非静态成员函数的情况下,我们知道this
来自隐式的 this 参数,但在 ctor 的情况下,因为 ctor 没有隐式的this< /code> 参数,我们允许在 ctor 内部使用的
this
从哪里来。隐式
this
参数的概念是实现细节还是标准规定所有非静态成员函数都有隐式 this 参数,在这种情况下,实现也允许构造函数具有隐式 this 参数。
编辑:
这个问题最重要的部分(IMO)是我们如何在 ctor 中使用名称 this
?例如,当我们编写:
this->p = 0; //here "this" behaves like a name
在上面的语句中 this
的行为就像一个名称。我们知道,在 C++ 中使用任何名称(例如变量名称)之前,我们必须对该名称进行声明。那么 this
的声明在哪里?在 ctor 的情况下,编译器是否隐式声明 this
?我的意思是,对于非静态成员函数,我可以理解它们将 this
声明为隐式 this 参数,但是在构造函数中会发生什么? 在 ctor 内部,我们如何能够使用名称 this
而无需声明?
I am learning about classes in C++ and know that non-static member functions have implicit this parameter. My first question is that does constructor also have an implicit this parameter just like non-static member functions. Note that i am not asking whether we can use this
inside a ctor as i already know that we can use this
inside a ctor.
Next, I know that inside a const
qualified non-static member function for a class X
, the type of this
is const X*
. And for a non-static member function(without const qualified), the type of this
is X*
. Similarly, inside the ctor the type of this
is always X*
. Here comes the deeper question.
We know that when we call a non-static member function(say like obj.func()
), then the address of the object named obj
is implicitly passed to the implicit this parameter of the method func
. So this explains "where the this
comes from in case of non-static member function".
Now, lets apply the same thing to constructors. For example, say we create an object of class X
using default ctor like:
X x; //does the default ctor also have an implicit this parameter to which the address of x is passed?
My second question is: Does the same thing happen to ctors? Like, the address of x
is passed to an implicit parameter of the default ctor. My current understanding is that ctors don't have an implicit this parameter. So when we write X x;
, the address of x
is not passed as an argument because the object is not created yet and so it doesn't make sense to pass its address. But from the standard we know that inside a ctor we can use the this
pointer. So my second question essentially is that, if ctors don't have an implicit this
parameter then where does the this
in the statement this->p = 0;
come from? We know that before using any name(like variable name) in C++, we must have a declaration for that name. So where is the declaration for this
? Does the compiler implicitly declares the this
in case of ctor? I mean, in case of non-static member function, i can understand that they have the declaration for this
as the implicit this parameter but what happens in ctors? How inside ctors we're able to use the name this
without having a declaration for that?
struct Name
{
private:
int p = 0;
int k = 0;
void func() //func is a non-static member function and so have an implicit this parameter
{
this->k = 0; // the "this" here comes from implicit this parameter
}
Name()
{
this->p = 0; //where does the "this" comes from here since ctor don't have implicit this parameter
}
};
My third question is that is the concept of implicit this parameter an implementation detail or does the standard says that non-static member function will have an implicit this parameter.
Summary
Do ctors have an implicit this parameter? This first question can also be phrased as "Do ctors also have an implicit object parameter?".
The standard says that we can use
this
inside a ctor. But where does thatthis
come from. For example, in case of a non-static member function, we know thatthis
comes from the implicit this parameter, but in case of ctors, since ctors don't have an implicitthis
parameter, where does thatthis
that we're allowed to use inside ctor come from.Is the concept of implicit
this
parameter an implementation detail or does the standard say that all non-static member functions have an implicit this parameter, in which case, ctors are also allowed by implementations to have an implicit this parameter.
Edit:
The most important part(IMO) of this question is that how are we able to use the name this
inside a ctor? For example when we write:
this->p = 0; //here "this" behaves like a name
In the above statement this
behaves like a name. And we know that before using any name(like variable name) in C++, we must have a declaration for that name. So where is the declaration for this
? Does the compiler implicitly declares the this
in case of ctor? I mean, in case of non-static member function, i can understand that they have the declaration for this
as the implicit this parameter but what happens in ctors? How inside ctors we're able to use the name this
without having a declaration for that?
如果你对这篇内容有疑问,欢迎到本站社区发帖提问 参与讨论,获取更多帮助,或者扫码二维码加入 Web 技术交流群。
绑定邮箱获取回复消息
由于您还没有绑定你的真实邮箱,如果其他用户或者作者回复了您的评论,将不能在第一时间通知您!
发布评论
评论(3)
从 C++ 标准的角度来看
该标准仅描述了
this
关键字的语义,而不是其值如何到达那里。这是完全抽象出来的,并且实现在实现它方面具有很大的灵活性。从理论计算机科学的角度来看
,正在构造的对象的地址(可通过 this 关键字获得)绝对是该对象的初始化过程(在 C++ 中称为“构造函数”)的输入。虚拟基子对象的地址也是如此,C++ 也可以通过 this 关键字提供这些地址,但无法从主输入中计算出来,因此任何此类都必须是附加输入。
请注意,CS 倾向于在过程中使用“参数”,更多地是在模板参数的意义上,而不是动态变量输入。而CS使用“功能”来表示没有副作用的过程。 C++ 构造函数不是 CS“函数”,虽然模板化构造函数是可能的(参数过程),但
this
的值是普通输入而不是参数化。C++ 构造函数也不是方法——不存在多态目标类型相关的调度,因此特别是
this
输入不用于调度。从参数传递的 ABI 规则的角度来看,
C++ 构造函数是一种特殊的成员函数。无法为它构造函数指针或以 C 风格调用它; C 函数的 ABI 要求不适用。
如果平台 ABI 显式描述 C++ 行为,则将存在一个或多个规则用于将
this
的值传递给 C++ 构造函数。这些规则可能会也可能不会指定与其他函数参数等效的机制,但每个针对该平台的符合 ABI 的 C++ 编译器都会根据构造函数的特殊规则的要求传递this
值。值得注意的是,将
this
传递给构造函数的 ABI 不需要与将this
传递给其他(非特殊和非静态)成员函数的方式相同,尽管实际的 ABI 很可能对两者使用相同的方法。From the perspective of the C++ standard
The standard only describes the semantics of the
this
keyword and not how its value gets there. That's completely abstracted away and an implementation has great flexibility in making it happen.From the perspective of theoretical computer science
The address of the object under construction, available via the
this
keyword, absolutely is an input to the initialization procedure (called "constructor" in C++) for the object. So are addresses of virtual base subobjects, which C++ also makes available via thethis
keyword but cannot be calculated from the main input, so any such must be additional inputs.Note that CS tends to use "parameter" with procedures more in the sense of template parameters than dynamic variable inputs. And CS uses "function" to mean a procedure without side effects. A C++ constructor is not a CS "function" and while templated constructors are possible (parametric procedures) the value of
this
is an ordinary input not a parameterization.Neither is a C++ constructor a method -- there is no polymorphic target-type-dependent dispatch, and so in particular the
this
input is not used for dispatch.From the perspective of ABI rules for parameter-passing
A C++ constructor is a special member function. There's no way to construct a function pointer for it or invoke it C-style; ABI requirements for C functions do not apply.
If the platform ABI explicitly describes C++ behaviors, then there will be one or more rules for passing the value(s) of
this
to a C++ constructor. Those rules may or may not specify a mechanism equivalent to other function arguments, but every ABI-compliant C++ compiler targeting that platform will passthis
values as required by the special rules for constructors.Notably, the ABI for passing
this
to a constructor isn't required to be equivalent to howthis
is passed to other (non-special and non-static) member functions, although practical ABIs may well use the same approach for both.标准中没有“隐式此参数”之类的内容。该标准将其称为“隐式对象参数”。
隐式对象参数仅与重载解析相关,它不会“成为”
this
。另外,this
被定义为与成员函数具有相同的 cv 限定。不,来自
[over.match.funcs]< /代码>
正在构造的对象。
隐式对象参数是重载解析规则的一部分,它不影响
this
。this
不是一个名称,它是一个语言关键字。语言将非静态成员函数中的this
定义为纯右值表达式。与 unqualified-id 不同(命名一个对象)在相同的位置,它们是左值表达式。这就是语言律师的答案。话虽如此,我确实发现“隐式对象参数变成
this
”是一个有用的心理模型。回想一下,构造函数(和析构函数)不能被 cv 限定,因此构造函数中没有任何东西可以区分,因此它是否存在并不重要。
There's no such thing as "implicit this parameter" in the standard. The standard calls it an "implicit object parameter".
An implicit object parameter is only relevant to overload resolution, it doesn't "become"
this
. Separately,this
is defined to have the same cv qualification as the member function.No, from
[over.match.funcs]
The object being constructed.
The implicit object parameter is part of the rules of overload resolution, it doesn't influence
this
.this
is not a name, it is a language keyword. The language definesthis
in a non-static member function to be a prvalue expression. Unlike an unqualified-id (that names an object) in the same position, which are glvalue expressions.That's the language-lawyer answer. Having said that, I do find that "implicit object parameter becomes
this
" is a useful mental model.Recall that constructors (and destructors) can't be cv qualified, so there isn't anything for it to distinguish in a constructor, so it doesn't matter if it exists or not.
“this”是一个关键字;它不需要声明,但始终在非静态成员函数中可用。
请参阅此处的标准草案。
请注意,
this
背后的机制尚未指定。"this" is a keyword; it doesn't need declaring, but is always available in non-static member functions.
See e.g. the draft standard here.
Note that the mechanism behind
this
is unspecified.