当 T 包含一个 `const` 数据成员时,为什么会删除 `std::optional<T>::operator=`?

问题描述

以下代码会导致编译器错误

#include <optional>

class A {
};
class B {
private:
    const A a;
};

int main()
{
    B b;
    std::optional<B> bo1;
    bo1 = b;
}

以 gcc 为例,错误如下:

main.cpp: In function 'int main()':
main.cpp:12:7: error: uninitialized const member in 'class B'
12 |     B b;
   |       ^
main.cpp:7:13: note: 'const A B::a' should be initialized
7 |     const A a;
  |             ^
main.cpp:14:11: error: use of deleted function 'std::optional<B>& std::optional<B>::operator=(std::optional<B>&&)'
14 |     bo1 = b;
   |           ^
In file included from main.cpp:1:
/lib/gcc-head/include/c++/12.0.0/optional:663:11: note: 'std::optional<B>& std::optional<B>::operator=(std::optional<B>&&)' is implicitly deleted because the default deFinition would be ill-formed:
663 |     class optional
    |           ^~~~~~~~
/lib/gcc-head/include/c++/12.0.0/optional:663:11: error: use of deleted function 'std::_Enable_copy_move<true,false,true,_Tag>& std::_Enable_copy_move<true,_Tag>::operator=(std::_Enable_copy_move<true,_Tag>&&) [with _Tag = std::optional<B>]'
In file included from /lib/gcc-head/include/c++/12.0.0/optional:43,from main.cpp:1:
/lib/gcc-head/include/c++/12.0.0/bits/enable_special_members.h:248:5: note: declared here
248 |     operator=(_Enable_copy_move&&) noexcept                         = delete;
    |     ^~~~~~~~

在 MSVC 上,再举一个例子,错误如下:

main.cpp
<source>(14): error C2280: 'std::optional<B> &std::optional<B>::operator =(const std::optional<B> &)': attempting to reference a deleted function
C:/data/msvc/14.29.29917-Pre/include\optional(445): note: compiler has generated 'std::optional<B>::operator =' here
C:/data/msvc/14.29.29917-Pre/include\optional(445): note: 'std::optional<B> &std::optional<B>::operator =(const std::optional<B> &)': function was implicitly deleted because a base class invokes a deleted or inaccessible function 'std::_Deleted_move_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty> &std::_Deleted_move_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty>::operator =(const std::_Deleted_move_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty> &)'
        with
        [
            _Ty=B
        ]
C:/data/msvc/14.29.29917-Pre/include\xsmf_control.h(131): note: 'std::_Deleted_move_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty> &)': function was implicitly deleted because a base class invokes a deleted or inaccessible function 'std::_Deleted_copy_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty> &std::_Deleted_copy_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty>::operator =(const std::_Deleted_copy_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty> &)'
        with
        [
            _Ty=B
        ]
C:/data/msvc/14.29.29917-Pre/include\xsmf_control.h(92): note: 'std::_Deleted_copy_assign<std::_Optional_construct_base<_Ty>,_Ty> &)': function was explicitly deleted
        with
        [
            _Ty=B
        ]
Compiler returned: 2

只要我们删除 const 中的 const A a; 关键字,错误就会消失。 根据 referenced standard on std::optional,在某些情况下 = 运算符的某些重载将被删除,具体取决于 std::is_...able_v 测试。在这种情况下,为什么 const 关键字会影响其中一些测试?

解决方法

optional 使用对象的 =

不能分配具有 const 数据成员的类。它只能被构建。

试试这个:

B b0;    
B b1;
b0=b1;

optional 不起作用,因为 B 不起作用。

另外,尝试static_assert(!std::is_copy_assignable_v<B>);,它通过了。

现在,std::optional 有一个“后门”。

B b;
std::optional<B> bo1;
bo1.emplace(b);

它构造而不是赋值。

Optional 理论上可以依赖于此;但是如果内容存在,则需要销毁它然后放置一个新对象。这是有风险的,会弄乱语义,而且是一个不好的计划。

,

const 数据成员在对象被构造后不能被修改。因此,正常工作的 operator= 是不可能的。