Thread: need help with a method

operator + must return an object an not a reference.

For a detailed explanation consult the bible part 1 (effective C++ by Scott Meyers) item 23 (Dont try to return a reference when you must return an object).

Why can't you just return a reference if that's effecient?
Because if you return a HOLE object you actually copy the hole thing while if you only return a reference you just copy the adress.

Originally posted by Zahl
Why can't you just return a reference if that's effecient?
Because if you return a HOLE object you actually copy the hole thing while if you only return a reference you just copy the adress.

Correct - it isnt as efficient, but when you return a reference, the objects you are refering to will have its destructor called before you have the oportunity to use it (it goes out of scope), therefore your code is refering to an object that no longer exists - a sure way to mess things up!!

ok so we decided that if you were to return a reference u would have to use new within the function. So why is that not ok. Consider this.....

Code:

text& operator + (const text& Text1,const text& Text2)
{
text* NewText=new text;
// concat Text1 and Text2
return *NewText;
}

now what happens when we add these text objects together.

Code:

text T1("foo");
text T2("bar");
text T3("wont");
text T4("do");
text T5;
T5=T1+T2+T3+T4;

How many temporary objects are created in that last expression and who called delete on the newed memory they contain??
That is why operator + MUST return an object. A reference is never suitable.