Why is `const int& k = i; ++i; ` possible?












6















I am supposed to determine whether this function is syntactically correct:



int f3(int i, int j) { const int& k=i; ++i; return k; }



I have tested it out and it compiles with my main function.



I do not understand why this is so.



Surely by calling the function f3 I create copies of the variables iand j in a new memory space and setting const int& k=i I am setting the memory space of the newly created k to the exact the same space of the memory space of the copied i, therefore any change, i.e. the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const



Any help is greatly appreciated






c++ syntax reference const







share|improve this question



























    6















    I am supposed to determine whether this function is syntactically correct:



    int f3(int i, int j) { const int& k=i; ++i; return k; }



    I have tested it out and it compiles with my main function.



    I do not understand why this is so.



    Surely by calling the function f3 I create copies of the variables iand j in a new memory space and setting const int& k=i I am setting the memory space of the newly created k to the exact the same space of the memory space of the copied i, therefore any change, i.e. the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const



    Any help is greatly appreciated






    c++ syntax reference const







    share|improve this question

























      6












      6








      6








      I am supposed to determine whether this function is syntactically correct:



      int f3(int i, int j) { const int& k=i; ++i; return k; }



      I have tested it out and it compiles with my main function.



      I do not understand why this is so.



      Surely by calling the function f3 I create copies of the variables iand j in a new memory space and setting const int& k=i I am setting the memory space of the newly created k to the exact the same space of the memory space of the copied i, therefore any change, i.e. the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const



      Any help is greatly appreciated






      c++ syntax reference const







      share|improve this question














      I am supposed to determine whether this function is syntactically correct:



      int f3(int i, int j) { const int& k=i; ++i; return k; }



      I have tested it out and it compiles with my main function.



      I do not understand why this is so.



      Surely by calling the function f3 I create copies of the variables iand j in a new memory space and setting const int& k=i I am setting the memory space of the newly created k to the exact the same space of the memory space of the copied i, therefore any change, i.e. the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const



      Any help is greatly appreciated






      c++ syntax reference const




      c++ syntax reference const






      share|improve this question













      share|improve this question











      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question










      asked 7 hours ago









      user9078057user9078057

      1118




      1118
























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          14















          the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const




          That's a misunderstanding.



          You may not change the value of the object through k but it can still be changed through other means. In other words, ++k is not allowed but ++i is still allowed, which will indirectly modify the value of k.



          Here's a far-fetched analogy.



          You may look through the window of a store and see what's inside but you won't be able to change what's inside the store. However, an employee, who is inside the store, can change the contents of the store. You will see that change from
          outside. You have const access or view access to the store while the employee has non-const access or change access to the store.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 5





            Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

            – user4581301
            6 hours ago











          • Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

            – David Schwartz
            6 hours ago











          Your Answer






          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function () {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function () {
          StackExchange.snippets.init();
          });
          });
          }, "code-snippets");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "1"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55367062%2fwhy-is-const-int-k-i-i-possible%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes








          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          14















          the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const




          That's a misunderstanding.



          You may not change the value of the object through k but it can still be changed through other means. In other words, ++k is not allowed but ++i is still allowed, which will indirectly modify the value of k.



          Here's a far-fetched analogy.



          You may look through the window of a store and see what's inside but you won't be able to change what's inside the store. However, an employee, who is inside the store, can change the contents of the store. You will see that change from
          outside. You have const access or view access to the store while the employee has non-const access or change access to the store.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 5





            Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

            – user4581301
            6 hours ago











          • Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

            – David Schwartz
            6 hours ago
















          14















          the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const




          That's a misunderstanding.



          You may not change the value of the object through k but it can still be changed through other means. In other words, ++k is not allowed but ++i is still allowed, which will indirectly modify the value of k.



          Here's a far-fetched analogy.



          You may look through the window of a store and see what's inside but you won't be able to change what's inside the store. However, an employee, who is inside the store, can change the contents of the store. You will see that change from
          outside. You have const access or view access to the store while the employee has non-const access or change access to the store.






          share|improve this answer





















          • 5





            Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

            – user4581301
            6 hours ago











          • Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

            – David Schwartz
            6 hours ago














          14












          14








          14








          the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const




          That's a misunderstanding.



          You may not change the value of the object through k but it can still be changed through other means. In other words, ++k is not allowed but ++i is still allowed, which will indirectly modify the value of k.



          Here's a far-fetched analogy.



          You may look through the window of a store and see what's inside but you won't be able to change what's inside the store. However, an employee, who is inside the store, can change the contents of the store. You will see that change from
          outside. You have const access or view access to the store while the employee has non-const access or change access to the store.






          share|improve this answer
















          the increment ++iwill result in ++k which is not possible given that it was set const




          That's a misunderstanding.



          You may not change the value of the object through k but it can still be changed through other means. In other words, ++k is not allowed but ++i is still allowed, which will indirectly modify the value of k.



          Here's a far-fetched analogy.



          You may look through the window of a store and see what's inside but you won't be able to change what's inside the store. However, an employee, who is inside the store, can change the contents of the store. You will see that change from
          outside. You have const access or view access to the store while the employee has non-const access or change access to the store.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 7 hours ago

























          answered 7 hours ago









          R SahuR Sahu

          169k1294193




          169k1294193








          • 5





            Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

            – user4581301
            6 hours ago











          • Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

            – David Schwartz
            6 hours ago














          • 5





            Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

            – user4581301
            6 hours ago











          • Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

            – David Schwartz
            6 hours ago








          5




          5





          Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

          – user4581301
          6 hours ago





          Not so far-fetched. That's a good analogy.

          – user4581301
          6 hours ago













          Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

          – David Schwartz
          6 hours ago





          Note that this is so because i itself is not const. So we have a const reference a non-const object. Const objects are different.

          – David Schwartz
          6 hours ago




















          draft saved

          draft discarded




















































          Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid …



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55367062%2fwhy-is-const-int-k-i-i-possible%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          -

          Popular posts from this blog

          How to label and detect the document text images

          Image
          1 $begingroup$ This is what I mean as document text image: I want to label the texts in image as separate blocks and my model should detect these labels as classes. NOTE: This is how the end result should be like: The labels like Block 1, Block 2, Block 3,.. should be Logo, Title, Date,.. Others, etc. Work done: First approach : I tried to implement this method via Object Detection, it didn't work. It didn't even detect any text. Second approach : Then I tried it using PixelLink. As this model is build for scene text detection, it detected each and every text in the image. But this method can detect multiple lines of text if the threshold values are increased. But I have no idea how do I add labels to the text blocks. PIXEL_CLS_WEIGHT_all_ones = 'PIXEL_CLS_WEIGHT_all_ones' PIXEL_C
          Read more

          Vallis Paradisi

          Image
          Coordinata: .mw-parser-output .geo-default,.mw-parser-output .geo-dms,.mw-parser-output .geo-dec{display:inline}.mw-parser-output .geo-nondefault,.mw-parser-output .geo-multi-punct{display:none}.mw-parser-output .longitude,.mw-parser-output .latitude{white-space:nowrap} 33°03′S 71°37′W  /  33.05°S 71.617°W  / -33.05; -71.617 Vallis Paradisi Res apud Vicidata repertae: Civitas : Chilia Numerus incolarum : 296 655 Zona horaria : UTC-4 Situs interretialis Nomen officiale : Valparaíso Gubernium Consilium : municipal council of Valparaíso Geographia Superficies : 401 600 000 Metrum quadratum Coniunctiones urbium Urbes gemellae : Ovetum , Badalona , Santa Fe , Ora longa , Sciamhaevum , Quantunia , Callao , Bat Yam , Melaka , Novorossiysk , Busan , Corduba , Odessa , Rosario , Malacca , Barcino , Soteropolis , Franciscopolis (California) , Guanajuato, Silao Tabula aut despectus Despectus in portum sinumque et urbem Vallis Paradisi Vallis Para
          Read more

          Tabula Rosettana

          Image
          Tabula multilinguis Rosettana in Museo Britannico ostenditur. Tabula Rosettana, [1] etiam titulo OGIS 90 agnita, est stela decreto de rebus sacris in Aegypto anno 196 a.C.n. lato inscripta. Tabula iuxta Rosettam Aegypti, urbem in delta Nili et ad oram maris Mediterranei iacentem, anno 1799 a milite Francico reperta est. Inventio stelae, linguis duabus scripturisque tribus inscriptae, eruditis Instituti Aegypti statim nuntiata est; ibi enim iussu imperatoris Napoleonis eruditi omnium scientiarum (sub aegide Commissionis Scientiarum et Artium) properaverant cum expeditione Francica. Qua a Britannis mox debellata, tabula Rosettana Londinium missa hodie apud Museum Britannicum iacet. Textus Graecus cito lectus interpretationi textuum Aegyptiorum (in formis hieroglyphica et demotica expressorum) gradatim adiuvit. Denique textum plene interpretatus est Ioannes Franciscus Champollion. Ab opere eruditorum cumulativo coepit hodiernus scripturae hieroglyphicae linguaeque Aegyptiae a
          Read more