Search Results

Search found 2 results on 1 pages for 'metamemetics'.

Page 1/1 | 1 

  • C++: Vector of objects vs. vector of pointers to new objects?

    - by metamemetics
    Hello, I am seeking to improve my C++ skills by writing a sample software renderer. It takes objects consisting of points in a 3d space and maps them to a 2d viewport and draws circles of varying size for each point in view. Which is better: class World{ vector<ObjectBaseClass> object_list; public: void generate(){ object_list.clear(); object_list.push_back(DerivedClass1()); object_list.push_back(DerivedClass2()); or... class World{ vector<ObjectBaseClass*> object_list; public: void generate(){ object_list.clear(); object_list.push_back(new DerivedClass1()); object_list.push_back(new DerivedClass2()); ?? Would be using pointers in the 2nd example to create new objects defeat the point of using vectors, because vectors automatically call the DerivedClass destructors in the first example but not in the 2nd? Are pointers to new objects necessary when using vectors because they handle memory management themselves as long as you use their access methods? Now let's say I have another method in world: void drawfrom(Viewport& view){ for (unsigned int i=0;i<object_list.size();++i){ object_list.at(i).draw(view); } } When called this will run the draw method for every object in the world list. Let's say I want derived classes to be able to have their own versions of draw(). Would the list need to be of pointers then in order to use the method selector (-) ?

    Read the article

  • C++ : Swapping template class elements of different types?

    - by metamemetics
    template< class T1, class T2 > class Pair { T1 first; T2 second; }; I'm being asked to write a swap() method so that the first element becomes the second and the second the first. I have: Pair<T2,T1> swap() { return Pair<T2,T1>(second, first); } But this returns a new object rather than swapping, where I think it needs to be a void method that changes its own data members. Is this possible to do since T1 and T2 are potentially different class types? In other words I can't simply set temp=first, first=second, second=temp because it would try to convert them to different types. I'm not sure why you would potentially want to have a template object that changes order of its types as it seems that would cause confusion but that appears to be what I'm being asked to do.

    Read the article

1