下面是一个例子，其中指向数据成员的指针可能很有用:

#include <iostream>
#include <list>
#include <string>

template <typename Container, typename T, typename DataPtr>
typename Container::value_type searchByDataMember (const Container& container, const T& t, DataPtr ptr) {
    for (const typename Container::value_type& x : container) {
        if (x->*ptr == t)
            return x;
    }
    return typename Container::value_type{};
}

struct Object {
    int ID, value;
    std::string name;
    Object (int i, int v, const std::string& n) : ID(i), value(v), name(n) {}
};

std::list<Object*> objects { new Object(5,6,"Sam"), new Object(11,7,"Mark"), new Object(9,12,"Rob"),
    new Object(2,11,"Tom"), new Object(15,16,"John") };

int main() {
    const Object* object = searchByDataMember (objects, 11, &Object::value);
    std::cout << object->name << '\n';  // Tom
}

另一个应用是侵入式列表。元素类型可以告诉列表它的next/prev指针是什么。所以列表不使用硬编码的名称，但仍然可以使用现有的指针:

// say this is some existing structure. And we want to use
// a list. We can tell it that the next pointer
// is apple::next.
struct apple {
    int data;
    apple * next;
};

// simple example of a minimal intrusive list. Could specify the
// member pointer as template argument too, if we wanted:
// template<typename E, E *E::*next_ptr>
template<typename E>
struct List {
    List(E *E::*next_ptr):head(0), next_ptr(next_ptr) { }

    void add(E &e) {
        // access its next pointer by the member pointer
        e.*next_ptr = head;
        head = &e;
    }

    E * head;
    E *E::*next_ptr;
};

int main() {
    List<apple> lst(&apple::next);

    apple a;
    lst.add(a);
}

我喜欢*和&运算符:

struct X 
{ 
    int a {0}; 
    int *ptr {NULL};

    int &fa() { return a; }
    int *&fptr() { return ptr; }
};

int main(void) 
{
    X x;
    int X::*p1 = &X::a;     // pointer-to-member 'int X::a'. Type of p1 = 'int X::*'
    x.*p1 = 10;

    int *X::*p2 = &X::ptr;  // pointer-to-member-pointer 'int *X::ptr'. Type of p2 = 'int *X::*' 
    x.*p2 = nullptr;
    X *xx;
    xx->*p2 = nullptr;

    int& (X::*p3)() = X::fa; // pointer-to-member-function 'X::fa'. Type of p3 = 'int &(X::*)()'
    (x.*p3)() = 20; 
    (xx->*p3)() = 30;

    int *&(X::*p4)() = X::fptr;  // pointer-to-member-function 'X::fptr'. Type of p4 = 'int *&(X::*)()'
    (x.*p4)() = nullptr; 
    (xx->*p4)() = nullptr;
}

事实上，只要成员是公共的或静态的，所有都是真的

指向成员的指针是c++的类型安全等价于C的offsetof()，它在stddef.h中定义:两者都返回某个字段位于类或结构中的信息。虽然在c++中也可以将offset()用于某些足够简单的类，但在一般情况下，它会失败，尤其是虚拟基类。因此指针成员被添加到标准中。它们还提供了更简单的语法来引用实际字段:

struct C { int a; int b; } c;
int C::* intptr = &C::a;       // or &C::b, depending on the field wanted
c.*intptr += 1;

要比:

struct C { int a; int b; } c;
int intoffset = offsetof(struct C, a);
* (int *) (((char *) (void *) &c) + intoffset) += 1;

至于为什么要使用offsetof()(或指向成员的指针)，在stackoverflow的其他地方有很好的答案。这里有一个例子:宏的C偏移是如何工作的?

它使得以统一的方式绑定成员变量和函数成为可能。下面是Car类的示例。更常见的用法是绑定std::pair::first和::second，当在STL算法和Boost上使用时。

#include <list>
#include <algorithm>
#include <iostream>
#include <iterator>
#include <boost/lambda/lambda.hpp>
#include <boost/lambda/bind.hpp>


class Car {
public:
    Car(int s): speed(s) {}
    void drive() {
        std::cout << "Driving at " << speed << " km/h" << std::endl;
    }
    int speed;
};

int main() {

    using namespace std;
    using namespace boost::lambda;

    list<Car> l;
    l.push_back(Car(10));
    l.push_back(Car(140));
    l.push_back(Car(130));
    l.push_back(Car(60));

    // Speeding cars
    list<Car> s;

    // Binding a value to a member variable.
    // Find all cars with speed over 60 km/h.
    remove_copy_if(l.begin(), l.end(),
                   back_inserter(s),
                   bind(&Car::speed, _1) <= 60);

    // Binding a value to a member function.
    // Call a function on each car.
    for_each(s.begin(), s.end(), bind(&Car::drive, _1));

    return 0;
}

我使用它的一种方式是，如果我有两个如何在一个类中做某事的实现，我想在运行时选择一个，而不必连续地通过if语句，即。

class Algorithm
{
public:
    Algorithm() : m_impFn( &Algorithm::implementationA ) {}
    void frequentlyCalled()
    {
        // Avoid if ( using A ) else if ( using B ) type of thing
        (this->*m_impFn)();
    }
private:
    void implementationA() { /*...*/ }
    void implementationB() { /*...*/ }

    typedef void ( Algorithm::*IMP_FN ) ();
    IMP_FN m_impFn;
};

显然，这只有在你觉得代码被敲打到足够的if语句减慢事情完成时才有用。在某个密集算法的深处。我仍然认为它比if语句更优雅，即使在它没有实际用途的情况下，但这只是我的观点。