最烦人的解析

发布于 2025-01-22 14:54:45 字数 503 浏览 0 评论 0原文

我从

class Timer {
 public:
  Timer();
};

class TimeKeeper {
 public:
  TimeKeeper(const Timer& t);

  int get_time()
  {
      return 1;
  }
};

int main() {
  TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer());
  return time_keeper.get_time();
}

从外观上看，它应该因行而导致的编译错误：

TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer());

但是只有在存在retoce> retod> retocer_keeper.get_time（）;时才发生。

为什么这条线甚至很重要，编译器会在time_keeper（timer（））构造上发现歧义。

原文

I got the code from here.

class Timer {
 public:
  Timer();
};

class TimeKeeper {
 public:
  TimeKeeper(const Timer& t);

  int get_time()
  {
      return 1;
  }
};

int main() {
  TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer());
  return time_keeper.get_time();
}

From the looks of it, it should get compile error due to the line:

TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer());

But it only happens if return time_keeper.get_time(); is present.

Why would this line even matter, the compiler would spot ambiguity on time_keeper(Timer() ) construction.

分享到QQ

分享到微博

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。

发布评论

需要登录才能够评论，你可以免费注册一个本站的账号。

染火枫林 2025-01-29 14:54:45

这是由于timekeeper time_keeper（timer（））;被解释为函数声明而不是变量定义。这本身不是一个错误，但是当您尝试访问time_keeper的get_time（）成员时（这是一个函数，而不是TimeKealer实例）时，您的编译器会失败。

这就是您的编译器查看代码的方式：

int main() {
  // time_keeper gets interpreted as a function declaration with a function argument.
  // This is definitely *not* what we expect, but from the compiler POV it's okay.
  TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer (*unnamed_fn_arg)());

  // Compiler complains: time_keeper is function, how on earth do you expect me to call
  // one of its members? It doesn't have member functions!
  return time_keeper.get_time();
}

This is due to the fact that TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer()); is interpreted as a function declaration and not as a variable definition. This, by itself, is not an error, but when you try to access the get_time() member of time_keeper (which is a function, not a TimeKeeper instance), your compiler fails.

This is how your compiler view the code:

int main() {
  // time_keeper gets interpreted as a function declaration with a function argument.
  // This is definitely *not* what we expect, but from the compiler POV it's okay.
  TimeKeeper time_keeper(Timer (*unnamed_fn_arg)());

  // Compiler complains: time_keeper is function, how on earth do you expect me to call
  // one of its members? It doesn't have member functions!
  return time_keeper.get_time();
}

回复收藏 0 原文

~没有更多了~