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 #38: Casting under Multiple Inheritance

Under multiple inheritance, an object may have many valid addresses. Each base class subobject of a complete object may have a unique address, and each of these addresses is a valid address for the complete object. (In a poorly designed single-inheritance hierarchy, an object might have two valid addresses. See Gotcha #70.)

class A { /* . . .*/ }; 
class B { /* . . .*/ };
class C : public A, public B { /* . . .*/ };
// . . .
C *cp = new C;
A *ap = cp; // OK
B *bp = cp; // OK

In the example above, the B subobject of the C complete object is likely to be allocated at a fixed offset, or "delta," from the start of the C object. Conversion of the derived class pointer cp to B * will therefore result in adjustment of cp by the delta to produce a valid B address. The conversion is type safe, efficient, and automatically implemented by the compiler.

Similarly, the existence of multiple valid addresses for an object forces C++ to be precise about the meaning of pointer comparison:

if( bp == cp ) // . . . 

The question we are asking is not "Do these two pointers contain the same bit pattern?" but rather "Do these two pointers refer to the same object?" The implementation of the condition may be more complex, but it's still efficient, safe, and automatic. The compiler probably implements the pointer comparison in a way similar to the following:

if( bp ? (char *)bp-delta==(char *)cp : cp==0 ) 

Both old- and new-style casts may be used to perform conversions that respect delta arithmetic on class object addresses. However, unlike the conversions above, there is no guarantee that the result of the cast will be a valid address. (A dynamic_cast will give such a guarantee but may introduce other problems. See Gotchas #97, #98, and #99.)

B *gimmeAB(); 
bp = gimmeAB();
cp = static_cast<C *>(bp); cp = (C *) bp;
typedef C *CP;
cp = CP( bp );

All three casts will perform delta arithmetic on bp, but the result will be valid only if the B object to which bp refers is part of a containing C object. If this assumption is incorrect, the result will be a bad address, equivalent to some creative C-style code:

cp = (C *)((char *)bp–delta) 

A reinterpret_cast will do just what it says. It will simply reinterpret the bit pattern of its argument to mean something else, probably without modifying the bits. Effectively, it "turns off" the delta arithmetic. (To be perfectly precise, the standard says the behavior of this cast is implementation-defined, but it's universally understood to "turn off hierarchy traversal." However, this behavior is not guaranteed by the standard, and reinterpret_cast may actually change the bit representation of the pointer.)

cp = reinterpret_cast<C *>(bp);  // yes, I do want to dump core . . . 

All these uses of casts are asking the object referred to by the B pointer to take on more responsibility than its interface can guarantee. We have a bad design, because we know too little about an object's capabilities and are using a static cast to force the object into a role it may not be able to fulfill. It's best to avoid static casts on class objects. Later, I'll argue that it's best to avoid dynamic casts as well. You get the picture.