Sign Up

Sign Up to our social questions and Answers Engine to ask questions, answer people’s questions, and connect with other people.

Have an account? Sign In

Have an account? Sign In Now

Sign In

Login to our social questions & Answers Engine to ask questions answer people’s questions & connect with other people.

Sign Up Here

Forgot Password?

Don't have account, Sign Up Here

Forgot Password

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link and will create a new password via email.

Have an account? Sign In Now

You must login to ask a question.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

Please briefly explain why you feel this question should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this answer should be reported.

Please briefly explain why you feel this user should be reported.

Sign InSign Up

The Archive Base

The Archive Base Logo The Archive Base Logo

The Archive Base Navigation

  • Home
  • SEARCH
  • About Us
  • Blog
  • Contact Us
Search
Ask A Question

Mobile menu

Close
Ask a Question
  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Feed
  • User Profile
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Buy Points
  • Users
  • Help
  • Buy Theme
  • SEARCH
Home/ Questions/Q 7049329
In Process

The Archive Base Latest Questions

Editorial Team
  • 0
Editorial Team
Asked: May 28, 20262026-05-28T03:00:00+00:00 2026-05-28T03:00:00+00:00

I have three function calls that I think should be treated (about) the same,

  • 0

I have three function calls that I think should be treated (about) the same, but clearly they are not. I’m trying to understand why one of three doesn’t compile (g++ -std=c++0x).

// Minimal example to reproduce a compile bug I want to understand.

#include <iostream>
#include <string>

using namespace std;


void bar(const string &&x) { cout << "bar: " << x << endl; }

string returns_a_string() { return string("cow"); }

int main( int argc, char *argv[] )
{
    bar(string("horse"));     // ok
    bar(returns_a_string());  // ok
    string aardvark = "aardvark";
    bar(aardvark);            // not ok, fails to compile, error in next comment
    /*
      rvalue-min.cpp:29:22: error: cannot bind ‘std::string {aka std::basic_string<char>}’ lvalue to ‘const string&& {aka const std::basic_string<char>&&}’
      rvalue-min.cpp:10:6: error:   initializing argument 1 of ‘void barR(const string&&)’
    */
}

This question is a bit along the lines of
C++0x rvalue references – lvalues-rvalue binding,
but, if it’s answered there, my apologies, I wasn’t able to distil it out.

What I want is to be able to call my function bar() with any sort of string and have it just work. It’s enough to define void barR(const string &x), but I’d really like to understand why.

Thanks much for any help in understanding why the third call is different.

  • 1 1 Answer
  • 0 Views
  • 0 Followers
  • 0
Share
  • Facebook
  • Report

Leave an answer
Cancel reply

You must login to add an answer.

Forgot Password?

Need An Account, Sign Up Here

1 Answer

  • Voted
  • Oldest
  • Recent
  • Random
  1. Editorial Team
    Editorial Team
    2026-05-28T03:00:01+00:00Added an answer on May 28, 2026 at 3:00 am

    The purpose of r-value reference parameters is to detect specifically when an object is an r-value. Because if an object is an r-value, then the function knows it won’t be used again, so it can do whatever it wants with it. If an l-value could bind to an r-value reference, that would mean the detection I was talking about wasn’t actually taking place.

    If you want to pass an l-value to one of these functions, you need to use std::move. Passing an object via std::move to a function that takes an r-value reference is like saying, “here, take this object, rip it’s guts out, I don’t care what happens to it”.

    For your purposes, the correct answer is to make the parameter const reference. An r-value is perfectly happy being bound to a const reference. Except for move constructors, making r-value reference parameters is almost never the correct thing to do.

    • 0
    • Reply
    • Share
      Share
      • Share on Facebook
      • Share on Twitter
      • Share on LinkedIn
      • Share on WhatsApp
      • Report

Sidebar

Related Questions

I have three classes that all have a static function called 'create'. I would
I have a function that receives three different people objects and generates a new
I have a calc function in java script that takes three integer parameters, following
I'm not a beginner, but the more I think about this issue, the more
I have a button that when clicked calls a function - this function does
I have 3 function in my class B. These three function have to access
I have taken three textboxes over aspx page. A JavaScript function is associated with
I have a ColdFusion function foo which takes three args, and the second two
I decided I should try to implement coroutines (I think that's how I should
I have a function, in which there is a loop which calls up the

Explore

  • Home
  • Add group
  • Groups page
  • Communities
  • Questions
    • New Questions
    • Trending Questions
    • Must read Questions
    • Hot Questions
  • Polls
  • Tags
  • Badges
  • Users
  • Help
  • SEARCH

Footer

© 2021 The Archive Base. All Rights Reserved
With Love by The Archive Base

Insert/edit link

Enter the destination URL

Or link to existing content

    No search term specified. Showing recent items. Search or use up and down arrow keys to select an item.