Constructor parameters with the same name as data members

[dwightarmyofchampions]

Can I have my constructor parameters be the same name and type as my
data members? If so, do I have to use the member initialization list?
What if one of them is a vector that requires a for loop?

 

[red floyd]

Can I have my constructor parameters be the same name and type as my
data members? If so, do I have to use the member initialization list?
What if one of them is a vector that requires a for loop?

Yes you can. I don't believe it's a good idea because it can lead to
confusion,
and maintainability issues.

What you want to do will work in an initialization list, I don't
believe it will work inside
the constructor body.


Is it so hard to add a trailing _ to either your constructor
parameters or to your member variables?

e.g.:

class A {
int x;
int y;
public:
A(int x_, int y_) : x(x_), y(y_) { }
};

 

[James Kanze]

On Mar 19, 9:35 am, (e-mail address removed) wrote:

Yes you can. I don't believe it's a good idea because it can
lead to confusion, and maintainability issues.

In general, I agree. But for very simple "classes", with all
data members public, I'll sometimes make an exception.

What you want to do will work in an initialization list, I
don't believe it will work inside the constructor body.

Inside the constructor body, the name refers to the parameter
(which hides the member); you can always access the member using
this->, however.

Is it so hard to add a trailing _ to either your constructor
parameters or to your member variables?

It is if you have any esthetic sensibility.

Generally speaking, the case should rarely occur. Variable
names are qualified nouns; the parameters will have names
like newSomething or initialSomething, whereas the members will
have names like mySomething (or ourSomething, in the case of
static members).