11

I'm studying data structures (List, Stack, Queue), and this part of code is confusing me.

ListNode( const Object& theElement = Object(), ListNode * node = NULL);


template<class Object>
ListNode<Object>::ListNode( const Object& theElement, ListNode<Object> * node) {
    element = theElement;
    next = node;
}
  1. Why there are assignment operators within function parameters?
  2. What does Object() call do?

3 Answers 3

19

Those are not assignment operators. Those are default arguments for the function.

A function can have one or more default arguments, meaning that if, at the calling point, no argument is provided, the default is used.

void foo(int x = 10) { std::cout << x << std::endl; }

int main()
{
  foo(5); // will print 5
  foo(); // will print 10, because no argument was provided
}

In the example code you posted, the ListNode constructor has two parameters with default arguments. The first default argument is Object(), which simply calls the default constructor for Object. This means that if no Object instance is passed to the ListNode constructor, a default of Object() will be used, which just means a default-constructed Object.

See also:
Advantage of using default function parameter
Default value of function parameter

Sign up to request clarification or add additional context in comments.

7 Comments

I'm tempted to up-vote if you would mention that default parameters are one of the more "evil" C++ features. They turn innocent constructors in converting constructors or default constructors. They make it hard to bind functions. The are a hindrance when only some parameters should be specified and others left to default.
Me neither. One size does not fit all. Sometimes they are very useful.
@pmr, I don't necessarily agree with you that they are "evil". They are a useful way to avoid repeating yourself by writing multiple constructors, when you can simply provide one constructor with a default parameter. The standard library implementations often take advantage of this by, e.g. vector(const allocator_type& a = allocator_type());
@pmr: I don't necessarily agree they are evil. However I agree that 1. the constructor should be marked explicit if it can be called with a single argument and 2. when parameters abund the function is a pain to use... but neither is specifically linked to default parameters per se.
@CharlesSalvia Making objects default constructible is one of the nice use cases for default arguments. I put "evil" in quotes to indicate that there are use cases but that some care has to be taken and they shouldn't be the first option.
|
3

The assignments in declarations provide default values for optional parameters. Object() means a call to Object's default constructor.

The effect of the default parameters is as follows: you can invoke ListNode constructor with zero, one, or two parameters. If you specify two parameter expressions, they are passed as usual. If you specify only one expression, its value is passed as the first parameter, and the second one is defaulted to NULL. If you pass no parameters, the first parameter is defaulted to an instance of Object created with its default constructor, and the second one is defaulted to NULL.

Comments

0

go to http://www.errorless-c.in/2013/10/operators-and-expressions.html for operators and expressions in c programming language

Comments

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Start asking to get answers

Find the answer to your question by asking.

Ask question

Explore related questions

See similar questions with these tags.