CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++dynamic-cast
piotr
piotr

Reputation: 5787

Any reason not to use address of dynamic_cast to reference?

Is there any reason against using Foo* foo = &dynamic_cast<Foo&>(*ptrFoobase);? I want it to throw bad_cast if the cast is incorrect, and saves an additional check for the pointer against zero.

Upvotes: 0

Views: 128

Answers (2)

Kerrek SB
Kerrek SB

Reputation: 476960

There isn't a strict universal reason why you shouldn't do it, but it's sort of ugly and hard to read.

If you have decided that throwing an exception is the right thing to do, you should probably revisit your other design choices: Why do you need a pointer at all? If you stick with references, there's no problem: Foo & foo = dynamic_cast<Foo&>(fooBaseRef);.

Personally, I'd say that if you have naked pointers in C++, you're in some sort of legacy mindset, so you should probably just add the null-check and throw manually. On the other hand, if you want to go for idiomatic, modern C++, prefer references all the way, and you get your exception for free.

Upvotes: 3

Fred Foo
Fred Foo

Reputation: 363517

It won't work if ptrFoobase could be null.

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions