More Books
C++ Gotchas: Avoiding Common Problems in Coding and Design
Main Page
Table of content
Copyright
Addison-Wesley Professional Computing Series
Preface
Acknowledgments
Chapter 1. Basics
Gotcha #1: Excessive Commenting
Gotcha #2: Magic Numbers
Gotcha #3: Global Variables
Gotcha #4: Failure to Distinguish Overloading from Default Initialization
Gotcha #5: Misunderstanding References
Gotcha #6: Misunderstanding Const
Gotcha #7: Ignorance of Base Language Subtleties
Gotcha #8: Failure to Distinguish Access and Visibility
Gotcha #9: Using Bad Language
Gotcha #10: Ignorance of Idiom
Gotcha #11: Unnecessary Cleverness
Gotcha #12: Adolescent Behavior
Chapter 2. Syntax
Gotcha #13: Array/Initializer Confusion
Gotcha #14: Evaluation Order Indecision
Gotcha #15: Precedence Problems
Gotcha #16: 'for' Statement Debacle
Gotcha #17: Maximal Munch Problems
Gotcha #18: Creative Declaration-Specifier Ordering
Gotcha #19: Function/Object Ambiguity
Gotcha #20: Migrating Type-Qualifiers
Gotcha #21: Self-Initialization
Gotcha #22: Static and Extern Types
Gotcha #23: Operator Function Lookup Anomaly
Gotcha #24: Operator '->' Subtleties
Chapter 3. The Preprocessor
Gotcha #25: '#define' Literals
Gotcha #26: '#define' Pseudofunctions
Gotcha #27: Overuse of '#if'
Gotcha #28: Side Effects in Assertions
Chapter 4. Conversions
Gotcha #29: Converting through 'void *'
Gotcha #30: Slicing
Gotcha #31: Misunderstanding Pointer-to-Const Conversion
Gotcha #32: Misunderstanding Pointer-to-Pointer-to-Const Conversion
Gotcha #33: Misunderstanding Pointer-to-Pointer-to-Base Conversion
Gotcha #34: Pointer-to-Multidimensional-Array Problems
Gotcha #35: Unchecked Downcasting
Gotcha #36: Misusing Conversion Operators
Gotcha #37: Unintended Constructor Conversion
Gotcha #38: Casting under Multiple Inheritance
Gotcha #39: Casting Incomplete Types
Gotcha #40: Old-Style Casts
Gotcha #41: Static Casts
Gotcha #42: Temporary Initialization of Formal Arguments
Gotcha #43: Temporary Lifetime
Gotcha #44: References and Temporaries
Gotcha #45: Ambiguity Failure of 'dynamic_cast'
Gotcha #46: Misunderstanding Contravariance
Chapter 5. Initialization
Gotcha #47: Assignment/Initialization Confusion
Gotcha #48: Improperly Scoped Variables
Gotcha #49: Failure to Appreciate C++'s Fixation on Copy Operations
Gotcha #50: Bitwise Copy of Class Objects
Gotcha #51: Confusing Initialization and Assignment in Constructors
Gotcha #52: Inconsistent Ordering of the Member Initialization List
Gotcha #53: Virtual Base Default Initialization
Gotcha #54: Copy Constructor Base Initialization
Gotcha #55: Runtime Static Initialization Order
Gotcha #56: Direct versus Copy Initialization
Gotcha #57: Direct Argument Initialization
Gotcha #58: Ignorance of the Return Value Optimizations
Gotcha #59: Initializing a Static Member in a Constructor
Chapter 6. Memory and Resource Management
Gotcha #60: Failure to Distinguish Scalar and Array Allocation
Gotcha #61: Checking for Allocation Failure
Gotcha #62: Replacing Global New and Delete
Gotcha #63: Confusing Scope and Activation of Member 'new' and 'delete'
Gotcha #64: Throwing String Literals
Gotcha #65: Improper Exception Mechanics
Gotcha #66: Abusing Local Addresses
Gotcha #67: Failure to Employ Resource Acquisition Is Initialization
Gotcha #68: Improper Use of 'auto_ptr'
Chapter 7. Polymorphism
Gotcha #69: Type Codes
Gotcha #70: Nonvirtual Base Class Destructor
Gotcha #71: Hiding Nonvirtual Functions
Gotcha #72: Making Template Methods Too Flexible
Gotcha #73: Overloading Virtual Functions
Gotcha #74: Virtual Functions with Default Argument Initializers
Gotcha #75: Calling Virtual Functions in Constructors and Destructors
Gotcha #76: Virtual Assignment
Gotcha #77: Failure to Distinguish among Overloading, Overriding, and Hiding
Gotcha #78: Failure to Grok Virtual Functions and Overriding
Gotcha #79: Dominance Issues
Chapter 8. Class Design
Gotcha #80: Get/Set Interfaces
Gotcha #81: Const and Reference Data Members
Gotcha #82: Not Understanding the Meaning of Const Member Functions
Gotcha #83: Failure to Distinguish Aggregation and Acquaintance
Gotcha #84: Improper Operator Overloading
Gotcha #85: Precedence and Overloading
Gotcha #86: Friend versus Member Operators
Gotcha #87: Problems with Increment and Decrement
Gotcha #88: Misunderstanding Templated Copy Operations
Chapter 9. Hierarchy Design
Gotcha #89: Arrays of Class Objects
Gotcha #90: Improper Container Substitutability
Gotcha #91: Failure to Understand Protected Access
Gotcha #92: Public Inheritance for Code Reuse
Gotcha #93: Concrete Public Base Classes
Gotcha #94: Failure to Employ Degenerate Hierarchies
Gotcha #95: Overuse of Inheritance
Gotcha #96: Type-Based Control Structures
Gotcha #97: Cosmic Hierarchies
Gotcha #98: Asking Personal Questions of an Object
Gotcha #99: Capability Queries
Bibliography

Gotcha #26: #define Pseudofunctions

In C, #define is often used to define pseudofunctions, where the efficiency of avoiding the cost of a function call is considered more important than safety:

#define repeated(b, m) (b & m & (b & m)-1) 

Of course, all the usual caveats apply with respect to any use of the preprocessor. In particular, the above definition is flawed.

typedef unsigned short Bits; 
enum { bit01 = 1<<0, bit02 = 1<<1, bit03 = 1<<2, // . . .
Bits a = 0;
const Bits mask = bit02 | bit03 | bit06;
// . . .
if( repeated( a+bit02, mask ) ) // oops!
   // . . .

Here, we've committed the common error of insufficient parenthesization of the pseudofunction. The correct definition doesn't leave anything to chance:

#define repeated(b, m) ((b) & (m) & ((b) & (m))-1) 

Except side effects. A moderately different use of the pseudofunction will yield a result that's both incorrect and ambiguous:

if( repeated( a+=bit02, mask ) ) // double oops! 
   // . . .

The first argument to the pseudofunction has a side effect. If repeated were a real function, the side effect would take place exactly once, before the function was called. In the case of this particular definition of repeated, the side effect will occur twice, and in an unspecified order (see Gotcha #14). Pseudofunctions are particularly dangerous because their use resembles that of real functions, but they have very different semantics. Because of this resemblance to real functions, even experienced C++ programmers tend to misuse pseudofunctions, because they assume they're calling a function.

In C++, an inline function is almost always preferable to a pseudofunction, because it will display proper function call semantics; it has the same meaning as a non-inline function:

inline Bits repeated( Bits b, Bits m ) 
   { return b & m & (b & m)-1; }

Macros used as pseudofunctions also suffer from the same scoping problems that affect macros used as manifest constants (see Gotcha #25):

gotcha26/execbump.cpp

int kount = 0; 
#define execBump( func ) (func(), ++kount)
// . . .
void aFunc() {
   extern void g();
   int kount;
   while( kount++ < 10 )
       execBump( g ); // increment local kount!
}

The user of the execBump pseudofunction is (one hopes) unaware that it references a variable spelled kount and has inadvertently modified the value of the local kount variable rather than the global one. A better solution would employ a function:

gotcha26/execbump.cpp

int kount = 0; 
inline void execBump( void (*func)() )
   { func(); ++kount; }

The use of an inline function binds the identifier kount to the global variable when the function body is compiled. The name will not be re-bound to a different kount variable when the function is called. (But we're still using a global variable; see Gotcha #3.)

An even better solution might employ a function object to better encapsulate the count:

gotcha26/execbump.cpp

class ExecBump { // Monostate. See Gotcha #69. 
 public:
   void operator ()( void (*func)() )
       { func(); ++count_; }
   int get_count() const
              { return count_; }
 private:
   static int count_;
};
// . . .
int ExecBump::count_ = 0;
// . . .
void aFunc() {
   extern void g();
   ExecBump exec;
   int count = 0;
   while( count++ < 10 )
       exec( g );
}

The proper uses of pseudofunctions are relatively rare and usually involve the use of the __LINE__, __FILE__, __DATE__, or __TIME__ preprocessor symbols:

gotcha28/myassert.h

#define myAssert( e ) ((!(e))?void(std::cerr << "Failed: " \ 
       << #e << " line " << __LINE__ << std::endl): void())

See also Gotcha #28.