为什么这两个模板函数的输出不同?

Why do the two template functions differ in output?

为什么 FuncOneFuncTwo 这两个模板函数的输出不同?

template <class T>
T * FuncOne(T & v)
{
    auto a = reinterpret_cast<const volatile char &>(v);
    auto b = & const_cast<char&>(a);
    auto c = reinterpret_cast<T *>(b);
    return c;    
}

template <class T>
T * FuncTwo(T & v)
{
    return reinterpret_cast<T *>(& const_cast<char&> (reinterpret_cast<const volatile char &>(v)));
}

测试两个函数的代码:

int main()
{       
  nonaddressable na;
  nonaddressable * naptr = FuncOne(na); 
  cout << "FuncOne: naptr = " << naptr << endl;
  naptr = FuncTwo(na); 
  cout << "FuncTwo: naptr = " << naptr << endl;

  nonaddressable * nbptr = new nonaddressable;
  cout << "Address of nbptr = " << nbptr << endl;  
  cout << "FuncOne: nbptr = " << FuncOne(*nbptr) << endl; 
  cout << "FuncTwo: nbptr = " << FuncTwo(*nbptr) << endl;
}

示例输出:

FuncOne: naptr = 0x61fddf   
FuncTwo: naptr = 0x61fe2f   

Address of nbptr = 0x7216e0   
FuncOne: nbptr = 0x61fddf   
FuncTwo: nbptr = 0x7216e0 

正如我们通过比较 nbptr 的值所看到的,FuncTwo 给出了预期的正确输出。但是为什么 FuncOne 不给出相同的输出,因为它只是另一种写法 FuncTwo?

使用的编译器:g++ 7.1.0

FuncOne不是FuncTwo的另一种写法。如果您替换了行

 auto a = reinterpret_cast<const volatile char &>(v);

来自

 auto& a = reinterpret_cast<const volatile char &>(v);

否则 const volatile char& 中的引用将在 type-deduction 期间被丢弃 a