CODEWITHSUNDEEP
c++stliostream
J.N.
J.N.

Reputation: 8421

Building an istringstream with a string temporary

While trying my code to answer another question I found out that the following didn't compile

#include <iostream>
#include <cstring>
#include <sstream>
#include <string>

using namespace std;

// (main omitted)
const char * coin = "3D";
istringstream ss(string(s));
int i;
ss >> hex >> i;              <--- error here
cout << (char) i << endl;

It failed with the following error:

test.cpp:15:11: error: invalid operands of types ‘std::istringstream(std::string) {aka std::basic_istringstream<char>(std::basic_string<char>)}’ and ‘std::ios_base&(std::ios_base&)’ to binary ‘operator>>’

While the following compiled and ran properly :

const char* coin = "3D";
string s(coin);
istringstream ss(s); // or directly istringstream ss("3D")
int i;
ss >> hex >> i;              
cout << (char) i << endl;

If I look at the definition of the constructor of istringstream, it accepts const std::string& (actually the basic_string<char> equivalent), and that compiles. So I guess the template argument deduction has a behaviour I don't understand and create a not so conform istringstream, but why ?

I am using GCC 4.6.1 (Ubuntu flavor).

EDIT : since istringstream is a typedef, I doubt there's any problem with templates in the end.

Upvotes: 2

Views: 1985

Answers (1)

Benjamin Lindley
Benjamin Lindley

Reputation: 103693

istringstream ss(string(s));

Your compiler thinks that's a declaration of a function taking a string (named s) and returning an istringstream. Surround the argument in parentheses in order to disambiguate it. By the way, what is s? Did you mean coin there?

istringstream ss( (string(coin)) );

Read this if you are confused.

In this particular case, you could of course have just done this:

istringstream ss(coin);

If your compiler supports it, you can also avoid the MVP using uniform initialization syntax:

istringstream ss{string{coin}};

That probably looks a bit odd to most people, I know it looks odd to me, but that's just because I'm so used to the old syntax.

Upvotes: 5

Related Questions