Is it safe to use c_str() on a temporary string? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowIs a string literal in c++ created in static memory?string and const char* and .c_str()?How do I iterate over the words of a string?Why is 'this' a pointer and not a reference?Why does std::ends cause string comparison to fail?Return value for a << operator function of a custom string class in C++Returning value from a functionconst qualifier for a string literalEasiest way to convert int to string in C++How can I convert a std::basic_string type to an array of char type?C++ Concatenating const char * with string, only const char * printsSystemC sc_uint from String Object

How do I go from 300 unfinished/half written blog posts, to published posts?

How easy is it to start Magic from scratch?

Why do professional authors make "consistency" mistakes? And how to avoid them?

What does this shorthand mean?

Anatomically Correct Strange Women In Ponds Distributing Swords

Whats the best way to handle refactoring a big file?

When airplanes disconnect from a tanker during air to air refueling, why do they bank so sharply to the right?

Implement the Thanos sorting algorithm

Return the Closest Prime Number

Why here is plural "We went to the movies last night."

Customer Requests (Sometimes) Drive Me Bonkers!

Horror movie/show or scene where a horse creature opens its mouth really wide and devours a man in a stables

How to Reset Passwords on Multiple Websites Easily?

How to use tikz in fbox?

What is the difference between "behavior" and "behaviour"?

Text adventure game code

Is it my responsibility to learn a new technology in my own time my employer wants to implement?

Does the Brexit deal have to be agreed by both Houses?

Can the Reverse Gravity spell affect the Meteor Swarm spell?

What makes a siege story/plot interesting?

I believe this to be a fraud - hired, then asked to cash check and send cash as Bitcoin

Why didn't Khan get resurrected in the Genesis Explosion?

Why were Madagascar and New Zealand discovered so late?

Anatomically Correct Mesopelagic Aves



Is it safe to use c_str() on a temporary string?



The Next CEO of Stack OverflowIs a string literal in c++ created in static memory?string and const char* and .c_str()?How do I iterate over the words of a string?Why is 'this' a pointer and not a reference?Why does std::ends cause string comparison to fail?Return value for a << operator function of a custom string class in C++Returning value from a functionconst qualifier for a string literalEasiest way to convert int to string in C++How can I convert a std::basic_string type to an array of char type?C++ Concatenating const char * with string, only const char * printsSystemC sc_uint from String Object










6















#include <iostream>

std::string get_data()

return "Hello";


int main()

const char* data = get_data().c_str();
std::cout << data << "n";
return 0;



"Hello" is printing on my machine; however, I am led to believe that this behavior is unspecified i.e. implementation-specific. Am I correct or will it always print "Hello", judging that the returned string is immutable and as such qualified as something that is constant? Thanks in advance!










share|improve this question









New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    Where does that string that gets returned go after c_str() is called and returns a pointer to some data?

    – tadman
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    stackoverflow.com/questions/23464504/…

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    Probably not a duplicate but helpful: stackoverflow.com/questions/349025/…. Also your interview question is missing #include <string> so technically it would be a compiler error ;)

    – Tas
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    I'm a bit surprised that the documentation for std::string::c_str doesn't mention destruction of the string as grounds for the returned pointer being invalidated (unless you consider the destructor to be a non-const member function). I think many people coming from a C background would benefit from having this written explicitly

    – alter igel
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @Tas: io-streams implement the shift-operators including overloads on basic_string ,so it needs its definition which requires it to include <string>. So it can't be a compiler error.

    – engf-010
    2 hours ago















6















#include <iostream>

std::string get_data()

return "Hello";


int main()

const char* data = get_data().c_str();
std::cout << data << "n";
return 0;



"Hello" is printing on my machine; however, I am led to believe that this behavior is unspecified i.e. implementation-specific. Am I correct or will it always print "Hello", judging that the returned string is immutable and as such qualified as something that is constant? Thanks in advance!










share|improve this question









New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.















  • 1





    Where does that string that gets returned go after c_str() is called and returns a pointer to some data?

    – tadman
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    stackoverflow.com/questions/23464504/…

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    Probably not a duplicate but helpful: stackoverflow.com/questions/349025/…. Also your interview question is missing #include <string> so technically it would be a compiler error ;)

    – Tas
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    I'm a bit surprised that the documentation for std::string::c_str doesn't mention destruction of the string as grounds for the returned pointer being invalidated (unless you consider the destructor to be a non-const member function). I think many people coming from a C background would benefit from having this written explicitly

    – alter igel
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @Tas: io-streams implement the shift-operators including overloads on basic_string ,so it needs its definition which requires it to include <string>. So it can't be a compiler error.

    – engf-010
    2 hours ago













6












6








6








#include <iostream>

std::string get_data()

return "Hello";


int main()

const char* data = get_data().c_str();
std::cout << data << "n";
return 0;



"Hello" is printing on my machine; however, I am led to believe that this behavior is unspecified i.e. implementation-specific. Am I correct or will it always print "Hello", judging that the returned string is immutable and as such qualified as something that is constant? Thanks in advance!










share|improve this question









New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












#include <iostream>

std::string get_data()

return "Hello";


int main()

const char* data = get_data().c_str();
std::cout << data << "n";
return 0;



"Hello" is printing on my machine; however, I am led to believe that this behavior is unspecified i.e. implementation-specific. Am I correct or will it always print "Hello", judging that the returned string is immutable and as such qualified as something that is constant? Thanks in advance!







c++






share|improve this question









New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 2 hours ago









alter igel

3,44711230




3,44711230






New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 2 hours ago









Aknin AbdoAknin Abdo

341




341




New contributor




Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Aknin Abdo is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







  • 1





    Where does that string that gets returned go after c_str() is called and returns a pointer to some data?

    – tadman
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    stackoverflow.com/questions/23464504/…

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    Probably not a duplicate but helpful: stackoverflow.com/questions/349025/…. Also your interview question is missing #include <string> so technically it would be a compiler error ;)

    – Tas
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    I'm a bit surprised that the documentation for std::string::c_str doesn't mention destruction of the string as grounds for the returned pointer being invalidated (unless you consider the destructor to be a non-const member function). I think many people coming from a C background would benefit from having this written explicitly

    – alter igel
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @Tas: io-streams implement the shift-operators including overloads on basic_string ,so it needs its definition which requires it to include <string>. So it can't be a compiler error.

    – engf-010
    2 hours ago












  • 1





    Where does that string that gets returned go after c_str() is called and returns a pointer to some data?

    – tadman
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    stackoverflow.com/questions/23464504/…

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago






  • 2





    Probably not a duplicate but helpful: stackoverflow.com/questions/349025/…. Also your interview question is missing #include <string> so technically it would be a compiler error ;)

    – Tas
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    I'm a bit surprised that the documentation for std::string::c_str doesn't mention destruction of the string as grounds for the returned pointer being invalidated (unless you consider the destructor to be a non-const member function). I think many people coming from a C background would benefit from having this written explicitly

    – alter igel
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @Tas: io-streams implement the shift-operators including overloads on basic_string ,so it needs its definition which requires it to include <string>. So it can't be a compiler error.

    – engf-010
    2 hours ago







1




1





Where does that string that gets returned go after c_str() is called and returns a pointer to some data?

– tadman
2 hours ago





Where does that string that gets returned go after c_str() is called and returns a pointer to some data?

– tadman
2 hours ago




2




2





stackoverflow.com/questions/23464504/…

– Wyck
2 hours ago





stackoverflow.com/questions/23464504/…

– Wyck
2 hours ago




2




2





Probably not a duplicate but helpful: stackoverflow.com/questions/349025/…. Also your interview question is missing #include <string> so technically it would be a compiler error ;)

– Tas
2 hours ago





Probably not a duplicate but helpful: stackoverflow.com/questions/349025/…. Also your interview question is missing #include <string> so technically it would be a compiler error ;)

– Tas
2 hours ago




1




1





I'm a bit surprised that the documentation for std::string::c_str doesn't mention destruction of the string as grounds for the returned pointer being invalidated (unless you consider the destructor to be a non-const member function). I think many people coming from a C background would benefit from having this written explicitly

– alter igel
2 hours ago






I'm a bit surprised that the documentation for std::string::c_str doesn't mention destruction of the string as grounds for the returned pointer being invalidated (unless you consider the destructor to be a non-const member function). I think many people coming from a C background would benefit from having this written explicitly

– alter igel
2 hours ago





1




1





@Tas: io-streams implement the shift-operators including overloads on basic_string ,so it needs its definition which requires it to include <string>. So it can't be a compiler error.

– engf-010
2 hours ago





@Tas: io-streams implement the shift-operators including overloads on basic_string ,so it needs its definition which requires it to include <string>. So it can't be a compiler error.

– engf-010
2 hours ago












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















7














The code exhibits undefined behavior.



get_data() returns a temporary which expires at the end of the full expression (*):



const char* data = get_data().c_str() ;
// ^~~~~~~~~~ ^
// this evaluates |
// to a prvalue |
// temporary expires here


data points to an internal of that object, so after the temporary ends you are left with a dangling pointer. Accessing it leads to Undefined Behavior. So the next line std::cout << data << "n"; makes the whole program exhibit Undefined Behavior.




*) There is an exception to this rule which doesn't apply here. If a prvalue is directly bound to a reference, the lifetime of the prvalue is extended to the lifetime of the reference.



For instance, this would have been fine:



int main()

const std::string& ref = get_data();
const char* data = ref.c_str();
std::cout << data << "n";
return 0;






share|improve this answer

























  • Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago







  • 1





    @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

    – bolov
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

    – bolov
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

    – kmdreko
    2 hours ago






  • 1





    The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

    – user4581301
    1 hour ago


















1














Yes it is, but not the way you're doing it.



If you did this:



std::cout << get_data().c_str() << 'n';


you'd be just fine.



That's because a temporary is guaranteed to live for the lifetime of the full expression it was created in. It may live longer in certain, very specific circumstances.



If you bind a reference to a temporary, it's lifetime will be extended to be the lifetime of the name it was bound to. So, code like this:



std::string const &x = get_data();
std::cout << x.c_str() << 'n';


would also work because the temporary returned by get_data would be bound to the reference named x, and so as long as x remained a valid name to use, the temporary would still exist.






share|improve this answer























    Your Answer






    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
    StackExchange.snippets.init();
    );
    );
    , "code-snippets");

    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "1"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );






    Aknin Abdo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55408411%2fis-it-safe-to-use-c-str-on-a-temporary-string%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    7














    The code exhibits undefined behavior.



    get_data() returns a temporary which expires at the end of the full expression (*):



    const char* data = get_data().c_str() ;
    // ^~~~~~~~~~ ^
    // this evaluates |
    // to a prvalue |
    // temporary expires here


    data points to an internal of that object, so after the temporary ends you are left with a dangling pointer. Accessing it leads to Undefined Behavior. So the next line std::cout << data << "n"; makes the whole program exhibit Undefined Behavior.




    *) There is an exception to this rule which doesn't apply here. If a prvalue is directly bound to a reference, the lifetime of the prvalue is extended to the lifetime of the reference.



    For instance, this would have been fine:



    int main()

    const std::string& ref = get_data();
    const char* data = ref.c_str();
    std::cout << data << "n";
    return 0;






    share|improve this answer

























    • Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

      – Wyck
      2 hours ago







    • 1





      @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

      – kmdreko
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

      – user4581301
      1 hour ago















    7














    The code exhibits undefined behavior.



    get_data() returns a temporary which expires at the end of the full expression (*):



    const char* data = get_data().c_str() ;
    // ^~~~~~~~~~ ^
    // this evaluates |
    // to a prvalue |
    // temporary expires here


    data points to an internal of that object, so after the temporary ends you are left with a dangling pointer. Accessing it leads to Undefined Behavior. So the next line std::cout << data << "n"; makes the whole program exhibit Undefined Behavior.




    *) There is an exception to this rule which doesn't apply here. If a prvalue is directly bound to a reference, the lifetime of the prvalue is extended to the lifetime of the reference.



    For instance, this would have been fine:



    int main()

    const std::string& ref = get_data();
    const char* data = ref.c_str();
    std::cout << data << "n";
    return 0;






    share|improve this answer

























    • Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

      – Wyck
      2 hours ago







    • 1





      @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

      – kmdreko
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

      – user4581301
      1 hour ago













    7












    7








    7







    The code exhibits undefined behavior.



    get_data() returns a temporary which expires at the end of the full expression (*):



    const char* data = get_data().c_str() ;
    // ^~~~~~~~~~ ^
    // this evaluates |
    // to a prvalue |
    // temporary expires here


    data points to an internal of that object, so after the temporary ends you are left with a dangling pointer. Accessing it leads to Undefined Behavior. So the next line std::cout << data << "n"; makes the whole program exhibit Undefined Behavior.




    *) There is an exception to this rule which doesn't apply here. If a prvalue is directly bound to a reference, the lifetime of the prvalue is extended to the lifetime of the reference.



    For instance, this would have been fine:



    int main()

    const std::string& ref = get_data();
    const char* data = ref.c_str();
    std::cout << data << "n";
    return 0;






    share|improve this answer















    The code exhibits undefined behavior.



    get_data() returns a temporary which expires at the end of the full expression (*):



    const char* data = get_data().c_str() ;
    // ^~~~~~~~~~ ^
    // this evaluates |
    // to a prvalue |
    // temporary expires here


    data points to an internal of that object, so after the temporary ends you are left with a dangling pointer. Accessing it leads to Undefined Behavior. So the next line std::cout << data << "n"; makes the whole program exhibit Undefined Behavior.




    *) There is an exception to this rule which doesn't apply here. If a prvalue is directly bound to a reference, the lifetime of the prvalue is extended to the lifetime of the reference.



    For instance, this would have been fine:



    int main()

    const std::string& ref = get_data();
    const char* data = ref.c_str();
    std::cout << data << "n";
    return 0;







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited 2 hours ago

























    answered 2 hours ago









    bolovbolov

    33.1k876140




    33.1k876140












    • Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

      – Wyck
      2 hours ago







    • 1





      @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

      – kmdreko
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

      – user4581301
      1 hour ago

















    • Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

      – Wyck
      2 hours ago







    • 1





      @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

      – bolov
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

      – kmdreko
      2 hours ago






    • 1





      The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

      – user4581301
      1 hour ago
















    Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago






    Your answer should include something with the words sequence point to get my upvote, because people still search for that - even though it doesn't appear in the standard.

    – Wyck
    2 hours ago





    1




    1





    @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

    – bolov
    2 hours ago





    @Wyck I don't see how sequence points are relevant here. The only thing that matters is the lifetime of the temporary. And that lifetime is until the end of the full expression it appears on.

    – bolov
    2 hours ago




    1




    1





    @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

    – bolov
    2 hours ago





    @Wyck newer standards don't use "sequence points" indeed. They use "sequenced after" and "sequenced before". I still don't see the connection to the problem at hand... Maybe I am missing something, could you please tell how sequencing relates here?

    – bolov
    2 hours ago




    1




    1





    @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

    – kmdreko
    2 hours ago





    @Wyck a single statement can possibly have multiple sequencing considerations, but they would not affect when a temporary is destroyed

    – kmdreko
    2 hours ago




    1




    1





    The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

    – user4581301
    1 hour ago





    The only thing that this doesn't cover is the Asker's statement that judging that the returned string is immutable suggests that they might not know that the string literal and the returned std::string are separate objects.

    – user4581301
    1 hour ago













    1














    Yes it is, but not the way you're doing it.



    If you did this:



    std::cout << get_data().c_str() << 'n';


    you'd be just fine.



    That's because a temporary is guaranteed to live for the lifetime of the full expression it was created in. It may live longer in certain, very specific circumstances.



    If you bind a reference to a temporary, it's lifetime will be extended to be the lifetime of the name it was bound to. So, code like this:



    std::string const &x = get_data();
    std::cout << x.c_str() << 'n';


    would also work because the temporary returned by get_data would be bound to the reference named x, and so as long as x remained a valid name to use, the temporary would still exist.






    share|improve this answer



























      1














      Yes it is, but not the way you're doing it.



      If you did this:



      std::cout << get_data().c_str() << 'n';


      you'd be just fine.



      That's because a temporary is guaranteed to live for the lifetime of the full expression it was created in. It may live longer in certain, very specific circumstances.



      If you bind a reference to a temporary, it's lifetime will be extended to be the lifetime of the name it was bound to. So, code like this:



      std::string const &x = get_data();
      std::cout << x.c_str() << 'n';


      would also work because the temporary returned by get_data would be bound to the reference named x, and so as long as x remained a valid name to use, the temporary would still exist.






      share|improve this answer

























        1












        1








        1







        Yes it is, but not the way you're doing it.



        If you did this:



        std::cout << get_data().c_str() << 'n';


        you'd be just fine.



        That's because a temporary is guaranteed to live for the lifetime of the full expression it was created in. It may live longer in certain, very specific circumstances.



        If you bind a reference to a temporary, it's lifetime will be extended to be the lifetime of the name it was bound to. So, code like this:



        std::string const &x = get_data();
        std::cout << x.c_str() << 'n';


        would also work because the temporary returned by get_data would be bound to the reference named x, and so as long as x remained a valid name to use, the temporary would still exist.






        share|improve this answer













        Yes it is, but not the way you're doing it.



        If you did this:



        std::cout << get_data().c_str() << 'n';


        you'd be just fine.



        That's because a temporary is guaranteed to live for the lifetime of the full expression it was created in. It may live longer in certain, very specific circumstances.



        If you bind a reference to a temporary, it's lifetime will be extended to be the lifetime of the name it was bound to. So, code like this:



        std::string const &x = get_data();
        std::cout << x.c_str() << 'n';


        would also work because the temporary returned by get_data would be bound to the reference named x, and so as long as x remained a valid name to use, the temporary would still exist.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered 1 hour ago









        OmnifariousOmnifarious

        41k11101162




        41k11101162




















            Aknin Abdo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.









            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Aknin Abdo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Aknin Abdo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.











            Aknin Abdo is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.














            Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55408411%2fis-it-safe-to-use-c-str-on-a-temporary-string%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Dapidodigma demeter Subspecies | Notae | Tabula navigationisDapidodigmaAfrotropical Butterflies: Lycaenidae - Subtribe IolainaAmplifica

            Constantinus Vanšenkin Nexus externi | Tabula navigationisБольшая российская энциклопедияAmplifica

            Gaius Norbanus Flaccus (consul 38 a.C.n.) Index De gente | De cursu honorum | Notae | Fontes | Si vis plura legere | Tabula navigationisHic legere potes