C++11 中 COW std::string 实现的合法性 [英] Legality of COW std::string implementation in C++11

问题描述

据我所知，写时复制不是在 C++11 中实现符合标准的 std::string 的可行方法，但是当它最近在讨论中出现时，我发现我自己无法直接支持这种说法.

It had been my understanding that copy-on-write is not a viable way to implement a conforming std::string in C++11, but when it came up in discussion recently I found myself unable to directly support that statement.

C++11 不承认基于 COW 的 std::string 实现，我是否正确?

Am I correct that C++11 does not admit COW based implementations of std::string?

如果是，这个限制是否在新标准(where)的某处明确说明?

If so, is this restriction explicitly stated somewhere in the new standard (where)?

或者这个限制是隐含的，从某种意义上说，这是对 std::string 的新要求的综合影响，排除了基于 COW 的 std::string.在这种情况下，我会对C++11 有效禁止基于 COW 的 std::string 实现"的章节和诗句风格派生感兴趣.

Or is this restriction implied, in the sense that it is the combined effect of the new requirements on std::string that precludes a COW based implementation of std::string. In this case, I'd be interested in a chapter and verse style derivation of 'C++11 effectively prohibits COW based std::string implementations'.

推荐答案

这是不允许的，因为按照标准 21.4.1 p6，迭代器/引用失效只允许

It's not allowed, because as per the standard 21.4.1 p6, invalidation of iterators/references is only allowed for

——作为任何标准库函数的参数引用将非常量 basic_string 作为参数.

— as an argument to any standard library function taking a reference to non-const basic_string as an argument.

——调用非常量成员函数，除了 operator[]、at、front、back、begin、rbegin、结束，然后撕裂.

— Calling non-const member functions, except operator[], at, front, back, begin, rbegin, end, and rend.

对于 COW 字符串，调用非常量 operator[] 将需要进行复制(并使引用无效)，这是上一段所不允许的.因此，在 C++11 中使用 COW 字符串不再合法.

For a COW string, calling non-const operator[] would require making a copy (and invalidating references), which is disallowed by the paragraph above. Hence, it's no longer legal to have a COW string in C++11.

这篇关于C++11 中 COW std::string 实现的合法性的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持IT屋！