From: James Curran (jamescurran_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-05-22 14:33:37
Rob Stewart wrote:
> Disagree strongly all you want, but I only use pointers to
> indicate optional arguments and to pass references (general
> meaning of the word) to objects that are expected to outlive the
> object to which they are given (usually in the ctor). In the
> former case, the argument may be null so I check for that case.
> In the latter, I often use RCSPs, but not always.
> I don't use non-const reference parameters often (and when I do
> they are always the first argument(s)). I find they work
> intuitively. You see, such functions always indicate, by their
> very name, that they are providing a value, so the name quite
> reasonably documents the output parameter.
Actually, I think you agree more with me than you think.
Here is a sample of usage we are discussion:
// First parameter describes option name/short name
// The second is parameter to option
// The third is description
("help,h", "", "print usage message")
("output,o", parameter("<pathname>", &ofile), "pathname for
Recast it to use a non-const reference parameter for "ofile" following your
guidelines of "the first argument" and "functions always indicate, by their
very name, that they are providing a value".
-- Truth, James Curran www.noveltheory.com (personal) www.njtheater.com (professional)
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk