The prefix operators return the object itself as an lvalue. The postfix operators return a copy of the object’s original value as an rvalue.
so in a statement like so *a++ a is being incremented and a copy of the original value of a is returned as rvalue but from the microsoft c++ language reference on Lvalues and Rvalues
An rvalue is a temporary value that does not persist beyond the expression that uses it
and gives an example
// lvalues_and_rvalues1.cpp
// compile with: /EHsc
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
int main()
{
int x = 3 + 4;
cout << x << endl;
}
In this example, x is an lvalue because it persists beyond the expression that defines it. The expression 3 + 4 is an rvalue because it evaluates to a temporary value that does not persist beyond the expression that defines it.
My questions:
1) what is the rvalue being returned from the *a++ so that it can be dereferenced?
2) Did i misunderstand any concept ?
Thanks in advance!
The prefix operators return the object itself as an lvalue. The postfix operators return a copy of the object’s original value as an rvalue.
Wrong! Well, mostly. If the quote is talking about all prefix/suffix operators, then it's completely errated. However, if it's talking about the ++ and -- prefix/postfix pairs, then it's correct.
Now, taking that into account...
what is the rvalue returning from the *a++ so that it can be dereferenced?
Assuming a is a pointer of some kind, a++ increments a and yields a rvalue consisting of a's value before the increment. The increment and decrement operators, ++ and --, in both postfix and prefix forms, require an lvalue as their operator. This is because rvalues are temporary, that is, their scope is limited by the expression their occur in, so these operators make little or no sense on them. Remember, these operators not only inspect/read, but change/write to the variable itself.
The unary * operator takes a pointer(-like) object and dereferences it, yielding an lvalue found in there. It works for both rvalue and lvalue pointers. This is because * can be considered sort of a "passive" operator. It does not change/write to the pointer itself, but dereferences it and returns the lvalue object at the address stored by the pointer, whose address is of course that contained by the pointer. As all that * needs is the memory address contained in a pointer object, and the address of the pointer itself, if it has one at all, is useless here, * makes sense for both rvalues and lvalues.
You can think that * "requires an rvalue", and that "lvalues can be used as rvalues when necessary", if it clarifies (or confuses?) things a little bit more.