Skip to main content

why does std::stack::pop() returns void?

I have atleast 2 good explanations for this apparently counter intuitive way of defining the interface.

1. SGI explanation: http://www.sgi.com/tech/stl/stack.html
One might wonder why pop() returns void, instead of value_type. That is, why must one use top() and pop() to examine and remove the top element, instead of combining the two in a single member function? In fact, there is a good reason for this design. If pop() returned the top element, it would have to return by value rather than by reference: return by reference would create a dangling pointer. Return by value, however, is inefficient: it involves at least one redundant copy constructor call. Since it is impossible for pop() to return a value in such a way as to be both efficient and correct, it is more sensible for it to return no value at all and to require clients to use top() to inspect the value at the top of the stack.

2. std::stack < T > is a template. If pop() returned the top element, it would have to return by value rather than by reference as per the of above explanation. That means, at the caller side it must be copied in an another T type of object. That involves a copy constructor or copy assignment operator call. What if this type T is sophisticated enough and it throws an exception during copy construction or copy assignment? In that case, the rvalue, i.e. the stack top (returned by value) is simply lost and there is no other way to retrieve it from the stack as the stack's pop operation is successfully completed!
----
src: EXCEPTION HANDLING: A FALSE SENSE OF SECURITY by Tom Cargill

Comments

outa-time said…
Hot blog. When I get to seraching on the web for
blogs, its got to be like yours! And the site is off
the hook! I just kept coming back!
Search for my 1800contacts coupon code blog, please!
dat-girl said…
Delightful blog. I devote my spare time just
looking for great blogs such as yours. I treasure this
site and will go back!
Please consider looking at my coupon 1800contacts blog.
Unusual blog. I liked the site its from so much I
have to visit it again! I surf the web for blogs like
yours in my spare time.
Check out the blog site with my in it!
Captivating blog. I love surfing the web for the
type of blogs that you do. It had me on the edge of my
seat and I kept going back to again and again!
Everyday of the month you need to peep my blog.
I took pleasure in the site and I will go back!
Surfing online for blogs like this one is worth my
time. Sensational blog.
Please take a journey to my 1800contacts com coupon blog.
die4-u said…
Creative blog. I just kept looking at it over and
over! Im always looking for blogs like this!
In an efford of finding the right info, check for my 1800contacts coupon code blog site.
after-hours said…
Creative blog. I just kept looking at it over and
over! Im always looking for blogs like this!
In an efford of finding the right info, check for my 1800contacts com coupon blog site.
Wondrous blog. Your site was very pleasing and I
will go back again! I like surfing the net for blogs
as good as yours.
Want to see top notch work, peep my plastic surgery breast enlargement blog site for the bomb work!
Anonymous said…
Thank you for the post. You might want to update it a tiny bit now in order not to inadvertently confuse the reader: in C++11 "rvalue" means something else.

Popular Content

Multi-dimensional arrays in C++11

What new can be said about multi-dimensional arrays in C++? As it turns out, quite a bit! With the advent of C++11, we get new standard library class std::array. We also get new language features, such as template aliases and variadic templates. So I'll talk about interesting ways in which they come together. It all started with a simple question of how to define a multi-dimensional std::array. It is a great example of deceptively simple things. Are the following the two arrays identical except that one is native and the other one is std::array? int native[3][4]; std::array<std::array<int, 3>, 4> arr; No! They are not. In fact, arr is more like an int[4][3]. Note the difference in the array subscripts. The native array is an array of 3 elements where every element is itself an array of 4 integers. 3 rows and 4 columns. If you want a std::array with the same layout, what you really need is: std::array<std::array<int, 4>, 3> arr; That's quite annoying for

Unit Testing C++ Templates and Mock Injection Using Traits

Unit testing your template code comes up from time to time. (You test your templates, right?) Some templates are easy to test. No others. Sometimes it's not clear how to about injecting mock code into the template code that's under test. I've seen several reasons why code injection becomes challenging. Here I've outlined some examples below with roughly increasing code injection difficulty. Template accepts a type argument and an object of the same type by reference in constructor Template accepts a type argument. Makes a copy of the constructor argument or simply does not take one Template accepts a type argument and instantiates multiple interrelated templates without virtual functions Lets start with the easy ones. Template accepts a type argument and an object of the same type by reference in constructor This one appears straight-forward because the unit test simply instantiates the template under test with a mock type. Some assertion might be tested in

Want speed? Use constexpr meta-programming!

It's official: C++11 has two meta-programming languages embedded in it! One is based on templates and other one using constexpr . Templates have been extensively used for meta-programming in C++03. C++11 now gives you one more option of writing compile-time meta-programs using constexpr . The capabilities differ, however. The meta-programming language that uses templates was discovered accidently and since then countless techniques have been developed. It is a pure functional language which allows you to manipulate compile-time integral literals and types but not floating point literals. Most people find the syntax of template meta-programming quite abominable because meta-functions must be implemented as structures and nested typedefs. Compile-time performance is also a pain point for this language feature. The generalized constant expressions (constexpr for short) feature allows C++11 compiler to peek into the implementation of a function (even classes) and perform optimization