I am a bit confused by the following code:
#include <iostream>
const char* f()
{
const char* arr[]={"test"};
return arr[0];
}
int main()
{
auto x = f();
std::cout << x;
}
In my opinion, this code should be UB (undefined behaviour). We return a pointer to a C-style array element inside a local scope. Things should go wrong. However, none of the compilers I tested with complain (I used -Wall -Wextra -pedantic
on both g++ and clang). valgrind
does not complain either.
Is the code above valid or is it UB as one would think?
PS: running it seems to produce the "correct" result, i.e. displaying "test", but that's not an indication of correctness.
No, it's not UB.
This:
const char* f()
{
const char* arr[]={"test"};
return arr[0];
}
Can be rewritten to the equivalent:
const char* f()
{
const char* arr0 = "test";
return arr0;
}
So we're just returning a local pointer, to a string literal. String literals have static storage duration, nothing dangles. The function really is the same as:
const char* f()
{
return "test";
}
If you did something like this:
const char* f() {
const char arr[] = "test"; // local array of char, not array of char const*
return arr;
}
Now that is UB - we're returning a dangling pointer.
The array arr
has local storage duration and will disappear at the end of scope. The string literal "test"
however is a pointer to a static storage location. Temporarily storing this pointer in the local array arr
before returning it doesn't change that. It will always be a static storage location.
Note that if the function were to return a C++ style string type instead of a C style const char *
, the additional conversion/bookkeeping would likely leave you with a value limited in lifetime according to C++ temporary rules.