Thread: List Initializing Return Value

Everytime you call toReturn, it returns a different vector.

Originally Posted by Imanuel

Check the output though .. wrong. Should be 2 4 6 8 10 but instead the first two numbers appear to be integer representations of some large number. That is wrong and I would like to know why.

I already told you why: everytime you call toReturn, it returns a different vector. Therefore, your call to begin() returns an iterator that is the beginning of a range, but your call to end() returns an iterator that is one past the end of a different range.

You can fix this with say:

Code:

vector<int> numbers = toReturn();
vector<int>::iterator iter = numbers.begin();
for(; iter != numbers.end(); ++iter){
    cout << *iter << " ";
}

Now the begin and end iterators denote the same range, i.e., the entire range of the numbers vector.

Consider this line:

Code:

vector<int>::iterator iter = toReturn().begin();

you create a vector by calling toReturn(), then get an iterator to the first element of the vector, and then the vector is destroyed after the statement.

The point is, the vector is destroyed. Therefore, the memory occupied by its elements can now be reused for other purposes. This explains the corrupted output, especially since this "create vector, get an iterator, then destroy it before using the iterator" process is repeated in the loop itself, except that for that one you're getting the one past the end iterator.

Of course it would also work if toReturn was declared like this:

Code:

vector<int>& toReturn() {
    static vector<int> x = {2, 4, 6, 8, 10};
    return x;
}

Assuming I got the syntax correct, since I haven't used that form of vector initialisation myself yet.

Of course, if you do that, then you get the various drawbacks associated with returning static local variables, so you might as well just get rid of the toReturn function.

Since you're using list-initialization, why not all the other nice features of C++11?

Code:

vector<int> toReturn(){ // Using void to denote an empty parameter list is from C and has always been unusual for C++.
    return {2, 4, 6, 8, 10};
}
 
int main(){ // If you don't use the command line arguments, why not use the parameter-less version of main?
  auto v = toReturn(); // Don't really need to spell out the type here. You could though, if it's not obvious that toReturn gives you a vector<int>.
    // (In this little example, it isn't, since toReturn isn't meaningful. But then, it's just a small example.)
  for(auto iter = v.begin(); iter != v.end(); ++iter){ // This is where auto really shines. Do you really want to type vector<int>::iterator?
    cout << *iter << " ";
  }

  // Or just write this:
  for(auto i : v) { // Range-based for loop FTW!
    cout << i << " ";
  }

  // Or since the rbfl keeps temporaries alive:
  for(auto i : toReturn()) {
    cout << i << " ";
  }

  cout << endl;
}