When should I use the new ranged-for and can I combine it with the new cbegin/cend?
The new ranged-for in C++11 will be very concise and useful, of course. As far as I understand how it works, it looks up the "containers" begin
and end
by trying *Argument-Depending-Lookup" (ADT).
But another addition is that all the containers now have cbegin()
and cend()
to get the const_iterators
for the container.
I am a bit confused, on the one hand I guess I should use cbegin()
if I do not want to modify the container, on the other hand I have to add an additional const
inside the ranged-for to get the same thing.
So, it looks like this:
// print all
for(const auto elem : data)
cout << elem
using ADT, finding data.begin(), thus const
needed.
vs
// print everything but the first (a reason not to use range-for)
for(auto it = data.cbegin()+1; it!=data.cend(); ++it)
cout << *it
using data.c开发者_如何转开发begin()
, thus no const
needed.
But would this not be more "idiomatic"?:
// print everything but the first (a reason not to use range-for)
for(const auto it = data.begin()+1; it!=data.end(); ++it)
cout << *it
- Did I get the "idiom" right? Any additions?
- When should I use
cbegin
? - Do I miss something with ranged-for, looking for
begin()
only?
Edit: correction of error Value vs Iterator
cbegin()
allows you to get const_iterator
s from a non-const
container without an explicit cast or conversion. If you have a const
container then begin()
will return a const_iterator
anyway.
The new for
construct uses begin()
because that's the most general, and it avoids too many special cases. Also, by default, the variable is a value, not an iterator or a reference.
std::vector<int> v;
for(auto i: v) // i is an int
dostuff(i);
This avoids the problem of modifying the container, as the element is copied. To get a reference you need to declare it:
for(auto &i: v)
dostuff(i);
I would use cbegin/cend in in the for
loop if the intention is not to modify the elements in the range. That's the obvious reason for adding them in the first place.
This is hardly idiomatic yet, as the new standard isn't even off the presses!
精彩评论