我非常支持让编译器为你做尽可能多的工作。当编写一个简单的类时,编译器可以为你提供以下“免费”:

默认(空)构造函数 复制构造函数 一个析构函数 赋值运算符(operator=)

但是它似乎不能给你任何比较操作符——比如operator==或operator!=。例如:

class foo
{
public:
    std::string str_;
    int n_;
};

foo f1;        // Works
foo f2(f1);    // Works
foo f3;
f3 = f2;       // Works

if (f3 == f2)  // Fails
{ }

if (f3 != f2)  // Fails
{ }

这有什么好的理由吗?为什么执行逐个成员的比较是一个问题?显然,如果类分配内存,那么你要小心,但对于一个简单的类,编译器肯定可以为你做这个?


当前回答

编译器不会知道你想要的是指针比较还是深层(内部)比较。

更安全的做法是不实现它,让程序员自己来做。然后他们可以做出所有他们喜欢的假设。

其他回答

c++ 20提供了一种轻松实现默认比较运算符的方法。

例子来自cppreference.com:

class Point {
    int x;
    int y;
public:
    auto operator<=>(const Point&) const = default;
    // ... non-comparison functions ...
};

// compiler implicitly declares operator== and all four relational operators work
Point pt1, pt2;
if (pt1 == pt2) { /*...*/ } // ok, calls implicit Point::operator==
std::set<Point> s; // ok
s.insert(pt1); // ok
if (pt1 <= pt2) { /*...*/ } // ok, makes only a single call to Point::operator<=>

恕我直言,没有什么“好的”理由。有这么多人同意这个设计决策的原因是因为他们没有学会掌握基于值的语义的力量。人们需要编写大量的自定义复制构造函数、比较操作符和析构函数,因为它们在实现中使用原始指针。

在使用适当的智能指针(如std::shared_ptr)时,默认的复制构造函数通常是可以的,假设的默认比较运算符的明显实现也可以。

It's answered C++ didn't do == because C didn't, and here is why C provides only default = but no == at first place. C wanted to keep it simple: C implemented = by memcpy; however, == cannot be implemented by memcmp due to padding. Because padding is not initialized, memcmp says they are different even though they are the same. The same problem exists for empty class: memcmp says they are different because size of empty classes are not zero. It can be seen from above that implementing == is more complicated than implementing = in C. Some code example regarding this. Your correction is appreciated if I'm wrong.

即使在c++ 20中,编译器仍然不会隐式地为你生成operator==

struct foo
{
    std::string str;
    int n;
};

assert(foo{"Anton", 1} == foo{"Anton", 1}); // ill-formed

但是自c++ 20以来,你将获得显式默认==的能力:

struct foo
{
    std::string str;
    int n;

    // either member form
    bool operator==(foo const&) const = default;
    // ... or friend form
    friend bool operator==(foo const&, foo const&) = default;
};

默认==执行成员式==(与默认复制构造函数执行成员式复制构造相同)。新规则还提供了==和!=之间的预期关系。例如,通过上面的声明,我可以写:

assert(foo{"Anton", 1} == foo{"Anton", 1}); // ok!
assert(foo{"Anton", 1} != foo{"Anton", 2}); // ok!

这个特定的特性(默认操作符==以及==和!=之间的对称)来自一个提议,该提议是更广泛的语言特性操作符<=>的一部分。

在这个视频中,STL的创造者Alex Stepanov在13:00左右回答了这个问题。总结一下,在见证了c++的发展之后,他认为:

It's unfortunate that == and != are not implicitly declared (and Bjarne agrees with him). A correct language should have those things ready for you (he goes further on to suggest you should not be able to define a != that breaks the semantics of ==) The reason this is the case has its roots (as many of C++ problems) in C. There, the assignment operator is implicitly defined with bit by bit assignment but that wouldn't work for ==. A more detailed explanation can be found in this article from Bjarne Stroustrup. In the follow up question Why then wasn't a member by member comparison used he says an amazing thing : C was kind of a homegrown language and the guy implementing these stuff for Ritchie told him he found this to be hard to implement!

然后他说,在(遥远的)未来,==和!=将隐式生成。