Software Development : Get Constant in C++

What does "const" mean to you?  Does it just mean a value can not be changed?  If so, you may want to read on!

Const is one of those things, which though not unique to C++ is given more meaning when you leverage C++ fully, const allows you to not only define a value as invariant, but also to instruct other programmers coming to your code how a value should be used, how when it is passed as a parameter it should be treated and ultimately how to protect data from needless alteration, de-synchronisation or simple corruption.

Const is therefore your friend, and if you've come to C++ from C, Java, C#, Python or one of the other myriad of languages which don't treat const with as much relevance as C++ you may want to read more than I can say on the topic. 

Bjarne Stroustrop (the inventor of C++) and other authors on the topic (notably Scott Meyers & Herb Sutter) explain in much more detail than I ever could, but for brevity here are two examples of const from my own coding standard which I implore you to digest.

1. Initialise Const Values in the constructor ONLY....

Any instance of the "Ex" class can now access it's "Pi" value, and we communicate to all viewers that the value is a constant and only edited in one place.

2. Where-ever possible pass values as constant references....

We know for certain that the "p_Radius" parameter being passed is NOT to be changed by the function, this is important when you are thinking about letting code document itself, and easily accomplished with "const", and especially annoying when using a language lacking const!

Whatever you do, use const consistently, this needs no specific explanation here, however if you begin following my second rule, you must stick to it!  Don't change half way through a program, if you import a third party API which is not using const in the same way, abstract that third party interface away with a series of your own shims, to make it correct for your usage (the compiler will optimise all these layers away) to leave you with consistent and more easily maintainable code.

You can find must much more about const-correctness elsewhere, I'd start here.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

C++ : Ignored qualifiers (-Wignored-qualifiers)

What is an ignored qualifier?  Well, in a class, lets have a student class: #include <string> class Student {     public:         const std::string Name;     private:         bool m_Present;     public:         Student(const std::string& p_Name)             :             Name(p_Name),             m_Present         {         }                 void SetPresent() { m_Present = true; }         void SetAbsent() { m_Present = false; } }; Now, we may want to access the present flag, therefore provide a function to do so:     bool Present() const { return m_Present } This function is telling the user of our class quite a bit, it tells them that the return type is boolean and that the calling of this function makes no changes to the class  contents (const trailing the parameter list). However, for me, this isn't quite right, I believe that we want to inform any user that the boolean returned is also constant, it does not change unless you alter the internal value with the "Set
Read more

C++: The Dilemma of using Exceptions

Image
As a C++ developer I've recently been in the midst of the Exceptions debate.  Exceptions as a feature of the C++ language have long divided the community, naively I've often put this down to their coming to the language from elsewhere (C perhaps) where exceptions were not the norm. This was a mistake, for in the projects I've previously worked upon the overhead of an exception compared to the ramifications of the error resulting in a crash have often totally outweighed the overhead, making deciding to employ an exception exceptionally easy (*bum bum*).  Exceptions were the norm, still are and should be to you too (according to the C++ Core Guidelines https://github.com/isocpp/CppCoreGuidelines/blob/master/CppCoreGuidelines.md#Ri-except ). The difficulty, the dilemma if you will, comes not from the feature, but the cost.  If you application domain demands high performance you can not risk using exceptions, the argument carries on therefore whether in not using them to avoid
Read more

Development : Anti-Hungarian Notation

Whilst cutting code I employ a coding style, which I enforce, whereby I output the scope of the variable being used with a prefix. "l_" for Local "m_" for Member "c_" for constant "e_" for enum And so forth, for static, parameter and a couple of others.  I also allow compounds of these, so a static constant would be: "sc_" This is useful in many languages, and imperative in those which are not type strict, such as Python. Some confuse this with "Hungarian Notation", it's not.  Hungarian notation is the practice of prefixing a type notification to the variable name, for example "an integer called count" might be "iCount". I have several problems with anyone using Hungarian Notation, and argue against it thus. With modern code completion and IDE lookup tools this is really not needed, with useful and meaningful naming of your variables the type is not needed and finally there are multiple types with the s
Read more