问题描述
首先，示例代码:
案例 1:
typedef char* CHARS;
typedef CHARS const CPTR; // constant pointer to chars
文字替换CHARS变成:
Textually replacing CHARS becomes:
typedef char* const CPTR; // still a constant pointer to chars
情况 2:
typedef char* CHARS;
typedef const CHARS CPTR; // constant pointer to chars
文字替换CHARS变成:
Textually replacing CHARS becomes:
typedef const char* CPTR; // pointer to constant chars
在情况 2 中，在文本替换 CHARS 后，typedef 的含义发生了变化.为什么会这样?C++ 如何解释这个定义?
In case 2, after textually replacing CHARS, the meaning of the typedef changed. Why is this so? How does C++ interpret this definition?
推荐答案
在文本替换的基础上分析 typedef 行为是没有意义的.类型定义名称不是宏，它们不会被文本替换.
There's no point in analyzing typedef behavior on the basis of textual replacement. Typedef-names are not macros, they are not replaced textually.
正如你自己所说的
typedef CHARS const CPTR;
和
typedef const CHARS CPTR;
这是因为同样的原因
typedef const int CI;
具有相同的含义
typedef int const CI;
Typedef-name 不定义新类型(仅是现有类型的别名)，但它们在某种意义上是原子的"，任何限定符(如 const)都适用于最顶层，即它们适用于隐藏在 typedef-name 后面的整个类型.一旦你定义了一个 typedef-name，你就不能在其中注入"一个限定符来修改任何更深层次的类型.
Typedef-name don't define new types (only aliases to existing ones), but they are "atomic" in a sense that any qualifiers (like const) apply at the very top level, i.e. they apply to the entire type hidden behind the typedef-name. Once you defined a typedef-name, you can't "inject" a qualifier into it so that it would modify any deeper levels of the type.
这篇关于C++ typedef const 指针的解释的文章就介绍到这了，希望我们推荐的答案对大家有所帮助，也希望大家多多支持跟版网！