Thread: rephrasing my question (clearer i hope).

how do i get into a tempstring a string value from a data member of an object in an array of objects?

i thought it was:

Code:

strcpy(tempstring, array[index].getFunction() );

where the function prototype is:

Code:

const char* getFunction() const;

array[index] gives me the object i need to work with inside my array, while the getFunction() returns the data member value of that particular object, right?

ok, got it... this works... but what is the last const doing in a function prototype like this:

Code:

const char* getSomething(int index) const

without that const it work like a charm, with it... i get:

egg.cpp: In member function `const char* apples::getApples() const':
egg.cpp:19: passing `const egg' as `this' argument of `const char*
egg::getEgg()' discards qualifiers


this is the full code:

Code:

#include <stdio.h>
#include <string.h>

class egg {
	char eggs[10];
	
	public:
		egg() {setEgg("eggs");}
		void setEgg(char a[]) {strcpy(eggs,a);}
		const char * getEgg() { return eggs;}
};

class apples {
	egg apple[10];
	int index;

	public:
		apples() {index = 0;}
		const char * getApples() const { return apple[index].getEgg(); }
};

int main(){
	egg theEgg;
	apples theApple;
	char i[10];

	strcpy(i, theApple.getApples() );
	printf("%s \n", i);

	return 0;
}

because the function prototypes given have that last "const" in there. So i'm just trying to figure out what it does. I found some examples in a book but i'm still clear as mud on this.

You add the "const" after a member function name if the member function does not logically change the state of the object or does not allow other code to change the state of the object.

Since getEgg() just returns a const char *, it doesn't change the state of the egg object, and whoever gets that char * cannot modify it because it is const. Because of this, the egg::getEgg function should be const.

Then, inside apples, the getApples() function actually is marked as const (referring to the const after the parentheses, not the const char*). This is logically correct, because it does not change its own state and only calls a function of one of its members that doesn't change the state of that member. The problem is that even though we know the getEgg() function is logically const, it doesn't say so in its declaration. You must add the "const" to the declaration of getEgg().

It is a good idea to get in the habit of adding the "const" to member functions that don't change anything in the class. It tells the user of that class (which might be you a few months later), that the function won't change anything. It also allows for some performance improvements when the compiler knows that nothing will be changed. That is why I'd say it is a better fix to add the const to getEgg() than to remove it from getApples().

Great, now it makes sense. And it works too, but that comes as a bonus only

Thank you very much!