Would making 'this' a reference rather than a pointer be better in retrospect?

Question

Possible Duplicate:
Why ‘this’ is a pointer and not a reference?

Is there any reason for this in C++ to be a pointer rather than a reference other than historical language decision? It feels a tad strange given that e.g. copy constructor or assignment operators both accept reference to "that", not a pointer.

[I honestly couldn't find this question, though it does feel like a possible duplicate]

I'm pretty sure it's a dupe but I'm having similar trouble finding it... — Cogwheel, Jul 01 '10 at 22:38
Possible duplicate of [Why 'this' is a pointer and not a reference?](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/645994/why-this-is-a-pointer-and-not-a-reference) - found via [google](http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Astackoverflow.com+c%2B%2B+why+is+this+not+a+reference). — Georg Fritzsche, Jul 01 '10 at 22:48

score 6 · Answer 1 · answered Jul 01 '10 at 22:41

6

From Bjarne Stroustrup's "The Design and Evolution of C++", Addison-Wesley, 1994, pp 39-40:

Sometimes, people ask why this is a pointer rather than a reference and why it is called this rather than self. When this was introduced into C with Classes, the language didn't have references, and C++ borrows its terminology from Simula rather than Smalltalk.

answered Jul 01 '10 at 22:41

Andy Thomas

84,978
11
107
151

Also here: http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq2.html#this – Fred Larson Jul 01 '10 at 22:42

score 3 · Accepted Answer · edited Jul 11 '17 at 23:40

3

References didn't exist in the language when this was created.

edited Jul 11 '17 at 23:40

syockit

5,747
1
24
33

answered Jul 01 '10 at 22:36

Cogwheel

22,781
4
49
67

1

If that's indeed so, it's sure *the* answer. – Jul 01 '10 at 22:39
Trying to find a source to cite... – Cogwheel Jul 01 '10 at 22:40
There we go, straight from the horse's mouth :) – Cogwheel Jul 01 '10 at 22:42

Would making 'this' a reference rather than a pointer be better in retrospect?

2 Answers2