短的例子:
#include <iostream>
int main()
{
int n;
[&](){n = 10;}(); // OK
[=]() mutable {n = 20;}(); // OK
// [=](){n = 10;}(); // Error: a by-value capture cannot be modified in a non-mutable lambda
std::cout << n << "\n"; // "10"
}
问题是:为什么我们需要mutable关键字?它与传统的参数传递到命名函数有很大不同。背后的原理是什么?
在我的印象中，按值捕获的全部意义在于允许用户更改临时对象——否则我几乎总是使用按引用捕获更好，不是吗?
有什么启示吗?
(顺便说一下，我用的是MSVC2010。这应该是标准的)
当前回答
我也想知道为什么[=]需要显式可变的最简单的解释是在这个例子中:
int main()
{
int x {1};
auto lbd = [=]() mutable { return x += 5; };
printf("call1:%d\n", lbd());
printf("call2:%d\n", lbd());
return 0;
}
输出:
call1:6
call2:11
单词:
您可以看到在第二次调用时x值是不同的(call1为1,call2为6)。
lambda对象按值保存捕获的变量(有自己的值) 复制)，如果[=]。 lambda可以被调用多次。
在一般情况下，我们必须有相同的捕获变量的值，基于已知的捕获值，有相同的可预测的lambda行为，而不是在lambda工作期间更新。这就是为什么默认行为假设为const(预测lambda对象成员的变化)，当用户意识到后果时，他会使用mutable来承担这个责任。
与按值捕获相同。举个例子:
auto lbd = [x]() mutable { return x += 5; };
其他回答
为了扩展Puppy的回答，lambda函数被设计为纯函数。这意味着给定唯一输入集的每次调用总是返回相同的输出。让我们将input定义为调用lambda时所有参数加上所有捕获变量的集合。
在纯函数中，输出完全依赖于输入，而不依赖于某些内部状态。因此，任何lambda函数，如果是纯的，不需要改变其状态，因此是不可变的。
When a lambda captures by reference, writing on captured variables is a strain on the concept of pure function, because all a pure function should do is return an output, though the lambda does not certainly mutate because the writing happens to external variables. Even in this case a correct usage implies that if the lambda is called with the same input again, the output will be the same everytime, despite these side effects on by-ref variables. Such side effects are just ways to return some additional input (e.g. update a counter) and could be reformulated into a pure function, for example returning a tuple instead of a single value.
FWIW, c++标准化委员会的知名成员Herb Sutter在Lambda正确性和可用性问题中给出了不同的答案:
Consider this straw man example, where the programmer captures a local variable by value and tries to modify the captured value (which is a member variable of the lambda object): int val = 0; auto x = [=](item e) // look ma, [=] means explicit copy { use(e,++val); }; // error: count is const, need ‘mutable’ auto y = [val](item e) // darnit, I really can’t get more explicit { use(e,++val); }; // same error: count is const, need ‘mutable’ This feature appears to have been added out of a concern that the user might not realize he got a copy, and in particular that since lambdas are copyable he might be changing a different lambda’s copy.
他的论文是关于为什么在c++ 14中应该改变这一点。它很短，写得很好，如果你想知道关于这个特定的特性“委员们在想什么”，值得一读。
你必须理解捕获的意思!这是捕获而不是参数传递!让我们看一些代码示例:
int main()
{
using namespace std;
int x = 5;
int y;
auto lamb = [x]() {return x + 5; };
y= lamb();
cout << y<<","<< x << endl; //outputs 10,5
x = 20;
y = lamb();
cout << y << "," << x << endl; //output 10,20
}
正如你所看到的，即使x被更改为20，仍然返回10 (x在lambda中仍然是5) 在lambda内部更改x意味着在每次调用中更改lambda本身(lambda在每次调用中都发生突变)。为了加强正确性，标准引入了mutable关键字。通过将lambda指定为mutable，就意味着对lambda的每次调用都可能导致lambda本身的更改。让我们看另一个例子:
int main()
{
using namespace std;
int x = 5;
int y;
auto lamb = [x]() mutable {return x++ + 5; };
y= lamb();
cout << y<<","<< x << endl; //outputs 10,5
x = 20;
y = lamb();
cout << y << "," << x << endl; //outputs 11,20
}
上面的例子表明，通过使lambda可变，在lambda内部改变x会在每次调用时用一个新的x值“突变”lambda，而这个x值与主函数中x的实际值没有任何关系
参见本草案，在5.1.2下[expr.prim.]，第5款:
lambda表达式的闭包类型有一个公共内联函数调用操作符(13.5.4)，其参数 和返回类型由lambda表达式的参数声明子句和trailingreturn-描述 类型分别。此函数调用操作符声明为const(9.3.1)当且仅当lambdaexpression为 Parameter-declaration-clause后面不跟mutable。
编辑litb的评论: 也许他们想到了按值捕获，这样外部对变量的更改就不会反映在lambda中?引荐是双向的，这就是我的解释。但我不知道这是否有用。
编辑kizzx2的评论: 使用lambda的大多数情况下是作为算法的函子。默认的constness允许它在常量环境中使用，就像普通的const限定函数可以在那里使用，但非const限定的函数不能。也许他们只是想让这些情况更直观，他们知道自己在想什么。：）
You need to think what is the closure type of your Lambda function. Every time you declare a Lambda expression, the compiler creates a closure type, which is nothing less than an unnamed class declaration with attributes (environment where the Lambda expression where declared) and the function call ::operator() implemented. When you capture a variable using copy-by-value, the compiler will create a new const attribute in the closure type, so you can't change it inside the Lambda expression because it is a "read-only" attribute, that's the reason they call it a "closure", because in some way, you are closing your Lambda expression by copying the variables from upper scope into the Lambda scope. When you use the keyword mutable, the captured entity will became a non-const attribute of your closure type. This is what causes the changes done in the mutable variable captured by value, to not be propagated to upper scope, but keep inside the stateful Lambda. Always try to imagine the resulting closure type of your Lambda expression, that helped me a lot, and I hope it can help you too.
