17

I know there are topics that are similar to this one already (such as this).

The example given in this topic was this:

std::string & rs1 = std::string();

Clearly, that std::string() is an rvalue. However, my question is why is s1 legal while s2 is not?

const std::string& s1 = "String literal"; std::string& s2 = "String literal";

The standard clearly states that string literals are lvalues (which is understandable since they are technically const char* behind the scenes). When I compile s2 though, I get the following:

prog.cpp:4:19: error: invalid initialization of non-const reference of type 'std::string& {aka std::basic_string<char>&}' from an rvalue of type 'const char*' std::string& s2 = "String literal";

I understand that the standard definition of lvalues and rvalues are mutually exclusive, so is this potentially an error with the compiler? I'm using gcc 4.9.2 in this example. Would this also be one of the cases where the literal is really an xvalue?

Improve this question
10
  • Because non-const lvalue references cannot bind to temporaries. const lvalues references can. A temporary object of type string is created from "const char*". This is bound to the reference. Commented Jan 9, 2015 at 21:46
  • Are you sure your example code is what you compiled? const std::string & s2 = "String literal" is totally valid, whereas, obviously std::string & s1 = "String literal" is not. Commented Jan 9, 2015 at 21:46
  • Edited it. Thanks for the quick reply. I just realized I copied/pasted wrong. Commented Jan 9, 2015 at 21:48
  • 2
    A "string literal" is a lexeme in the language grammar, not an object. The object denoted by the lexeme is a character array, not an object of type std::string (which is something from the library and entirely different). Commented Jan 9, 2015 at 21:51
  • 3
    @KerrekSB That seems to be vague. The standard specifies that "The effect of attempting to modify a string literal is undefined.", which implies that in some contexts the string literal is the character array. Commented Jan 9, 2015 at 22:00

4 Answers 4

Reset to default
22

The problem is that a string literal is not of type std::string or subclass thereof - it is of type
char const[N]. Thus the type of the initializer is not reference compatible with the target type of the reference, and a temporary must be created and bound to the reference.

However, temporaries cannot be bound to non-const lvalue references. I.e. your case is equivalent to

std::string& s = std::string("Abcdefg");

which is, even according to you, clearly ill-formed.

Actually the precise reason it doesn't work is not because temporaries cannot be bound to non-const lvalue references, but rather that the initializer of a non-const lvalue reference is subject to certain requirements that char const[N] cannot meet in this case, [dcl.init.ref]/5:

A reference to type “cv1 T1” is initialized by an expression of type “cv2 T2” as follows:

  • If the reference is an lvalue reference and the initializer expression

    • is an lvalue (but is not a bit-field), and “cv1 T1” is reference-compatible with “cv2 T2” or
    • has a class type (i.e., T2 is a class type), where T1 is not reference-related to T2, and can be implicitly converted to an lvalue of type “cv3 T3,” where “cv1 T1” is reference-compatible with “cv3 T3”106(this conversion is selected by enumerating the applicable conversion functions (13.3.1.6) and choosing the best one through overload resolution (13.3)),

    then the reference is bound to the initializer expression lvalue in the first case and to the lvalue result of the conversion in the second case (or, in either case, to the appropriate base class subobject of the object).

  • Otherwise, the reference shall be an lvalue reference to a non-volatile const type (i.e., cv1 shall be const), or the reference shall be an rvalue reference.

    • [..]

106) This requires a conversion function (12.3.2) returning a reference type.

Improve this answer
Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

Comments

10

The string literal may be an lvalue, but it's not a string object. There's a temporary string being created which is an rvalue.

Improve this answer

1 Comment

To expound on this, s1 takes advantage of the rule that binding a const reference to a temporary extends the lifetime of the temporary to the scope of the reference, while binding a non-const reference to a temporary is an error.
2

First, a string is a const char * or const char [N] not a std::string. So you're not directly assigning those char * strings. std::string has a constructor that takes a const char [N] and the compiler automatically uses it to construct a new instance.

But when using const for s2 you've just made it impossible for the compiler to assign the new std::string instance to s2.

So in the end I think you've misunderstood the difference between a "string" of type const char [N] and a "string" of type std::string. The standard is referring to const char [N] when it is talking about strings being an lvalue but you're attempting to apply that to a std::string to which the standard's rule doesn't apply.

Improve this answer

2 Comments

First, a string literal is a const char[N], not a char*.
Thanks, but was the sarcasm really necessary?
0

Type and value category are two separate things.

A string literal, like "String literal", is of type const char[15], but its value category is const char(&)[15].

So, you might be wondering how it can be considered a temporary object when its value category is an lvalue, and lvalues typically imply that they occupy memory.

To answer that question :

The compiler first needs to check the type to be matched, and the string literal's type doesn't directly match the expected type std::string.

However, std::string has a constructor that can take a const char*, so the compiler needs to create a temporary std::string to perform the conversion. This temporary std::string cannot bind to an std::string&, which expects an lvalue reference. That's why it throws an error!

Improve this answer

Comments

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.