Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!att!westmark!mole-end!mat
From: mat@mole-end.UUCP (Mark A Terribile)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Why use reference type over pointer type?
Summary: Is there an FAQ list
Message-ID: <422@mole-end.UUCP>
Date: 6 Aug 90 05:24:49 GMT
References: <1676@dinl.mmc.UUCP> <1806@cs.rit.edu>
Organization: mole-end--private system.  admin: mole-end!newtnews
Lines: 37

> > Its obvious, I'm new to C++.
> > What does does a reference type give me over a pointer type
> > that I've come to love and know well in C?  ......

This sound like a candidate for an FAQ (frequently asked questions) list.
 
> I, as a professor, have been asked this so many times that I would love
> to hear people's opinions on this.
> 
> I personally prefer to use them because I like
> 
> 	call-by-reference semantics
> 	"lvalue" - type variables
> 
> but I do not care for aliases.
> 
> I do have a hard time justifying their existence to more practically-minded
> students, however.

Well, for one thing, by changing just the declaration for the CALLED function,
you control (with appropriate typechecking) whether you have call by copy-
value or call-by-reference.  This is definitely a maintanance win that ought
to interest practically-minded students.

For another, the type system considers  X&  to be the same as  X  for the
purpose of overloading resolution and conversions.  This means that the
same rules apply whether call-by-reference or call-by-value is involved.

There are good reasons to not allow overloads of  operator+( X* , X* ) ,
not the least of which is that the code using this operator would have
to be written in a strange way and that no member form would be possible;
these problems don't affect  operator+( X&, X& ) .

-- 

 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile