vector::at vs. vector::operator[]

Question

I know that at() is slower than [] because of its boundary checking, which is also discussed in similar questions like C++ Vector at/[] operator sp

Answer 1

at can be clearer if you have a pointer to the vector:

return pVector->at(n);
return (*pVector)[n];
return pVector->operator[](n);

Performance aside, the first of these is the simpler and clearer code.