Suppose I have this function:
void my_test()
{
A a1 = A_factory_func();
A a2(A_factory_func());
double b1 = 0.5;
double b2(0.5);
A c1;
This is from C++ Programming Language by Bjarne Stroustrup:
An initialization with an = is considered a copy initialization. In principle, a copy of the initializer (the object we are copying from) is placed into the initialized object. However, such a copy may be optimized away (elided), and a move operation (based on move semantics) may be used if the initializer is an rvalue. Leaving out the = makes the initialization explicit. Explicit initialization is known as direct initialization.
Assignment is different from initialization.
Both of the following lines do initialization. A single constructor call is done:
A a1 = A_factory_func(); // calls copy constructor
A a1(A_factory_func()); // calls copy constructor
but it's not equivalent to:
A a1; // calls default constructor
a1 = A_factory_func(); // (assignment) calls operator =
I don't have a text at the moment to prove this but it's very easy to experiment:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class A {
public:
A() {
cout << "default constructor" << endl;
}
A(const A& x) {
cout << "copy constructor" << endl;
}
const A& operator = (const A& x) {
cout << "operator =" << endl;
return *this;
}
};
int main() {
A a; // default constructor
A b(a); // copy constructor
A c = a; // copy constructor
c = b; // operator =
return 0;
}
double b1 = 0.5;
is implicit call of constructor.
double b2(0.5);
is explicit call.
Look at the following code to see the difference:
#include <iostream>
class sss {
public:
explicit sss( int )
{
std::cout << "int" << std::endl;
};
sss( double )
{
std::cout << "double" << std::endl;
};
};
int main()
{
sss ffffd( 7 ); // calls int constructor
sss xxx = 7; // calls double constructor
return 0;
}
If your class has no explicit constuctors than explicit and implicit calls are identical.