virtual inheritance - Page 13

Templates, interfaces (multiple inheritance) and static functions (named constructors)

- by fledgling Cxx user

Setup I have a graph library where I am trying to decompose things as much as possible, and the cleanest way to describe it that I found is the following: there is a vanilla type node implementing only a list of edges: class node { public: int* edges; int edge_count; }; Then, I would like to be able to add interfaces to this whole mix, like so: template <class T> class node_weight { public: T weight; }; template <class T> class node_position { public: T x; T y; }; and so on. Then, the actual graph class comes in, which is templated on the actual type of node: template <class node_T> class graph { protected: node_T* nodes; public: static graph cartesian(int n, int m) { graph r; r.nodes = new node_T[n * m]; return r; } }; The twist is that it has named constructors which construct some special graphs, like a Cartesian lattice. In this case, I would like to be able to add some extra information into the graph, depending on what interfaces are implemented by node_T. What would be the best way to accomplish this? Possible solution I thought of the following humble solution, through dynamic_cast<>: template <class node_T, class weight_T, class position_T> class graph { protected: node_T* nodes; public: static graph cartesian(int n, int m) { graph r; r.nodes = new node_T[n * m]; if (dynamic_cast<node_weight<weight_T>>(r.nodes[0]) != nullptr) { // do stuff knowing you can add weights } if (dynamic_cast<node_position<positionT>>(r.nodes[0]) != nullptr) { // do stuff knowing you can set position } return r; } }; which would operate on node_T being the following: template <class weight_T, class position_T> class node_weight_position : public node, public node_weight<weight_T>, public node_position<position_T> { // ... }; Questions Is this -- philosophically -- the right way to go? I know people don't look nicely at multiple inheritance, though with "interfaces" like these it should all be fine. There are unfortunately problems with this. From what I know at least, dynamic_cast<> involves quite a bit of run-time overhead. Hence, I run into a problem with what I had solved earlier: writing graph algorithms that require weights independently of whether the actual node_T class has weights or not. The solution with this 'interface' approach would be to write a function: template <class node_T, class weight_T> inline weight_T get_weight(node_T const & n) { if (dynamic_cast<node_weight<weight_T>>(n) != nullptr) { return dynamic_cast<node_weight<weight_T>>(n).weight; } return T(1); } but the issue with it is that it works using run-time information (dynamic_cast), yet in principle I would like to decide it at compile-time and thus make the code more efficient. If there is a different solution that would solve both problems, especially a cleaner and better one than what I have, I would love to hear about it!

Search Results

Search found 11078 results on 444 pages for 'virtual inheritance'.

Page 13/444 | < Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 | Next Page >

- by fledgling Cxx user

- by Sean O'Connor

- by amiad

- by Mahesh

- by Summer_More_More_Tea

- by Jeff Stock

- by shinjuo

- by user1508167

- by mike1616

- by James

- by Masi

- by Kanini

- by Nrew

- by Kanini

- by stkdev248

- by Brendan Long

- by Shahid

- by Valvaris

- by Xianlin

- by user23950

- by Arkapravo

- by joshsvoss

- by Thanh Tran

- by ojrac

- by Rowan

< Previous Page | 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 | Next Page >