Search Results

Search found 5128 results on 206 pages for 'member hiding'.

Page 2/206 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• c++ class member functions selected by traits

  - by Jive Dadson

  I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched stackoverflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instatiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state info was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

  Read the article

• Caching for a Custom Repositiory Adapter for WebSphere Portal Virtual Member Manager

  - by Spike Williams

  I'm looking at writing a custom repository adapter to interact with Virtual Member Manager on WebSphere Portal 6.1. Basically, its a layer that takes a request in the form of a commonj.sco.DataObject and passes that on to an external web service, to get various information on our logged in users that is not otherwise available in LDAP. I'm concerned about the performance hit of going to a service every time we want to pull some permission from the back end. My question is, can the Virtual Member Manager handle caching of data going in and out of the custom repository adapters, or is that something I'm going to have to build into the adapter myself?

  Read the article

• c++ defining a static member of a template class with type inner class pointer

  - by Jack

  I have a template class like here (in a header) with a inner class and a static member of type pointer to inner class template <class t> class outer { class inner { int a; }; static inner *m; }; template <class t> outer <t>::inner *outer <t>::m; when i want to define that static member i says "error: expected constructor, destructor, or type conversion before '*' token" on the last line (mingw32-g++ 3.4.5)

  Read the article

• c++ class member functions instatiated by traits

  - by Jive Dadson

  I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched stackoverflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state info was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (vc++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

  Read the article

• C++ class member functions instantiated by traits

  - by Jive Dadson

  I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched Stack Overflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state information was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (VC++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

  Read the article

• Property hiding and reflection (C#)

  - by tehMick

  Declaring a property in a derived class that matches the name of a property in the base class "hides" it (unless it overrides it with the override keyword). Both the base and derived class properties will be returned by Type.GetProperties() if their types don't match. However, if their types do match, shockingly only the derived class's property is returned. For instance: class A { protected double p; public int P { get { return (int)p; } set { p = value; } } } class B : A { public new int P { get { return (int)p; } set { p = value; } } } class C : B { public new float P { get { return (float)p; } set { p = value; } } } Calling typeof(C).GetProperties() will only return B.P and C.P. Is it possible to call GetProperties() in a way that returns all three? There is almost certainly a way to do it by traversing the inheritance hierarchy, but is there a cleaner solution?

  Read the article

• How to ensure that a member variable is initialized before calling a class method

  - by Omkar Ekbote

  There's a class with a parametrized constructor that initializes a member variable. All public methods of the class then use this member variable to do something. I want to ensure that the caller always creates an object using the parametrized constructor (there is also a setter for this member variable) and then call that object's methods. In essence, it should be impossible for the caller to call any method without setting a value to the member variable (either by using the parametrized constructor or the setter). Currently, a caller can simply make an object using the default constructor and then call that object's method - I want to avoid checking whether or not the member variable is set in each and every one of the 20-odd methods of the class (and throw an exception if it is not). Though a runtime solution is acceptable (better than the one I mentioned above); a compile-time solution is preferable so that any developer will not be allowed to make that mistake and then waste hours debuggging it!

  Read the article

• Access reading error when using class member variable

  - by bsg

  Hi, I have a class with private member variables declared in a header file. In my constructor, I pass in some filenames and create other objects using those names. This works fine. When I try to add another member variable, however, and initialize it in the constructor, I get an access reading violation. I sent the code to someone else and it works fine on his computer. Any idea what could be wrong? Here is the offending code: The .h file: class QUERYMANAGER { INDEXCACHE *cache; URLTABLE *table; SNIPPET *snip; int* iquery[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH]; int* metapointers[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH]; int blockpointers[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH]; int docpositions[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH]; int numberdocs[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH]; int frequencies[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH]; int docarrays[MAX_QUERY_LENGTH][256]; int qsize; public: QUERYMANAGER(); QUERYMANAGER(char *indexfname, char *btfname, char *urltablefname, char *snippetfname, char *snippetbtfname); ~QUERYMANAGER(); This is the .cpp file: #include "querymanagernew.h" #include "snippet.h" using namespace std; QUERYMANAGER::QUERYMANAGER(char *indexfname, char *btfname, char *urltablefname, char *snippetfname, char *snippetbtfname){ cache = new INDEXCACHE(indexfname, btfname); table = new URLTABLE(urltablefname); snip = new SNIPPET(snippetfname, snippetbtfname); //this is where the error occurs qsize = 0; } I am totally at a loss as to what is causing this - any ideas? Thanks, bsg

  Read the article

• Optional Member Objects

  - by David Relihan

  Okay, so you have a load of methods sprinkled around your systems main class. So you do the right thing and refactor by creating a new class and perform move method(s) into a new class. The new class has a single responsibility and all is right with the world again: class Feature { public: Feature(){}; void doSomething(); void doSomething1(); void doSomething2(); }; So now your original class has a member variable of type object: Feature _feature; Which you will call in the main class. Now if you do this many times, you will have many member-objects in your main class. Now these features may or not be required based on configuration so in a way it's costly having all these objects that may or not be needed. Can anyone suggest a way of improving this? At the moment I plan to test in the newly created class if the feature is enabled - so the when a call is made to method I will return if it is not enabled. I could have a pointer to the object and then only call new if feature is enabled - but this means I will have to test before I call a method on it which would be potentially dangerous and not very readable. Would having an auto_ptr to the object improve things: auto_ptr<Feature> feature; Or am I still paying the cost of object invokation even though the object may\or may not be required. BTW - I don't think this is premeature optimisation - I just want to consider the possibilites.

  Read the article

• A monkey could do this better - Access to and availability of private member functions in C++

  - by David

  I am wandering the desert of my brain. I'm trying to write something like the following: class MyClass { // Peripherally Related Stuff public: void TakeAnAction(int oneThing, int anotherThing) { switch(oneThing){ case THING_A: TakeThisActionWith(anotherThing); break; //cases THINGS_NOT_A: }; private: void TakeThisActionWith(int thing) { string outcome = new string; outcome = LookUpOutcome(thing); // Do some stuff based on outcome return; } string LookUpOutcome(int key) { string oc = new string; oc = MyPrivateMap[key]; return oc; } map<int, string> MyPrivateMap; Then in the .cc file where I am actually using these things, while compiling the TakeAnAction section, it [CC, the solaris compiler] throws an an error: 'The function LookUpOutcome must have a prototype' and bombs out. In my header file, I have declared 'string LookUpOutcome(int key);' in the private section of the class. I have tried all sorts of variations. I tried to use 'this' for a little while, and it gave me 'Can only use this in non-static member function.' Sadly, I haven't declared anything static and these are all, putatively, member functions. I tried it [on TakeAnAction and LookUp] when I got the error, but I got something like, 'Can't access MyPrivateMap from LookUp'. MyPrivateMap could be made public and I could refer to it directly, I guess, but my sensibility says that is not the right way to go about this [that means that namespace scoped helper functions are out, I think]. I also guess I could just inline the lookup and subsequent other stuff, but my line-o-meter goes on tilt. I'm trying desperately not to kludge it.

  Read the article

• Class member functions instantiated by traits

  - by Jive Dadson

  I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched Stack Overflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state information was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (VC++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice? UPDATE: Here's another try at explaining it. I want the user to be able to fill out an order (manifest) for a custom optimizer, something like ordering off of a Chinese menu - one from column A, one from column B, etc.. Waiter, from column A (updaters), I'll have the BFGS update with Cholesky-decompositon sauce. From column B (line-searchers), I'll have the cubic interpolation line-search with an eta of 0.4 and a rho of 1e-4, please. Etc... UPDATE: Okay, okay. Here's the playing-around that I've done. I offer it reluctantly, because I suspect it's a completely wrong-headed approach. It runs okay under vc++ 2008. #include <boost/utility.hpp> #include <boost/type_traits/integral_constant.hpp> namespace dj { struct CBFGS { void bar() {printf("CBFGS::bar %d\n", data);} CBFGS(): data(1234){} int data; }; template<class T> struct is_CBFGS: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_CBFGS<CBFGS>: boost::true_type{}; struct LMQN {LMQN(): data(54.321){} void bar() {printf("LMQN::bar %lf\n", data);} double data; }; template<class T> struct is_LMQN: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_LMQN<LMQN> : boost::true_type{}; struct default_optimizer_traits { typedef CBFGS update_type; }; template<class traits> class Optimizer; template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_LMQN<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf(" LMQN %lf\n", self.data); } template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_CBFGS<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf("CBFGS %d\n", self.data); } template<class traits = default_optimizer_traits> class Optimizer{ friend typename traits::update_type; //friend void dj::foo<traits>(typename Optimizer<traits> & self); // How? public: //void foo(void); // How??? void foo() { dj::foo<traits>(*this); } void bar() { data.bar(); } //protected: // How? typedef typename traits::update_type update_type; update_type data; }; } // namespace dj int main_() { dj::Optimizer<> opt; opt.foo(); opt.bar(); std::getchar(); return 0; }

  Read the article

• Class member functions instantiated by traits [policies, actually]

  - by Jive Dadson

  I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched Stack Overflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate member functions? [Update: I used the wrong term here. It should be "policies" rather than "traits." Traits describe existing classes. Policies prescribe synthetic classes.] The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state information was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (VC++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice? UPDATE: Here's another try at explaining it. I want the user to be able to fill out an order (manifest) for a custom optimizer, something like ordering off of a Chinese menu - one from column A, one from column B, etc.. Waiter, from column A (updaters), I'll have the BFGS update with Cholesky-decompositon sauce. From column B (line-searchers), I'll have the cubic interpolation line-search with an eta of 0.4 and a rho of 1e-4, please. Etc... UPDATE: Okay, okay. Here's the playing-around that I've done. I offer it reluctantly, because I suspect it's a completely wrong-headed approach. It runs okay under vc++ 2008. #include <boost/utility.hpp> #include <boost/type_traits/integral_constant.hpp> namespace dj { struct CBFGS { void bar() {printf("CBFGS::bar %d\n", data);} CBFGS(): data(1234){} int data; }; template<class T> struct is_CBFGS: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_CBFGS<CBFGS>: boost::true_type{}; struct LMQN {LMQN(): data(54.321){} void bar() {printf("LMQN::bar %lf\n", data);} double data; }; template<class T> struct is_LMQN: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_LMQN<LMQN> : boost::true_type{}; // "Order form" struct default_optimizer_traits { typedef CBFGS update_type; // Selection from column A - updaters }; template<class traits> class Optimizer; template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_LMQN<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf(" LMQN %lf\n", self.data); } template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_CBFGS<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf("CBFGS %d\n", self.data); } template<class traits = default_optimizer_traits> class Optimizer{ friend typename traits::update_type; //friend void dj::foo<traits>(typename Optimizer<traits> & self); // How? public: //void foo(void); // How??? void foo() { dj::foo<traits>(*this); } void bar() { data.bar(); } //protected: // How? typedef typename traits::update_type update_type; update_type data; }; } // namespace dj int main() { dj::Optimizer<> opt; opt.foo(); opt.bar(); std::getchar(); return 0; }

  Read the article

• C++ typename of member variable

  - by aaa

  hello everybody Is it possible to get typename of a member variable? For example: struct C { int value ; }; typedef typeof(C::value) type; // something like that? Thanks

  Read the article

• F# record member evaluation

  - by Oldrich Svec

  Why is t.b evaluated on every call? And is there any way how to make it evaluate only once? type test = { a: float } member x.b = printfn "oh no" x.a * 2. let t = { a = 1. } t.b t.b

  Read the article

• C++ Pointer member function with templates assignment with a member function of another class

  - by Agusti

  Hi, I have this class: class IShaderParam{ public: std::string name_value; }; template<class TParam> class TShaderParam:public IShaderParam{ public: void (TShaderParam::*send_to_shader)( const TParam&,const std::string&); TShaderParam():send_to_shader(NULL){} TParam value; void up_to_shader(); }; typedef TShaderParam<float> FloatShaderParam; typedef TShaderParam<D3DXVECTOR3> Vec3ShaderParam; In another class, I have a vector of IShaderParams* and functions that i want to send to "send_to_shader". I'm trying assign the reference of these functions like this: Vec3ShaderParam *_param = new Vec3ShaderParam; _param-send_to_shader = &TShader::setVector3; This is the function: void TShader::setVector3(const D3DXVECTOR3 &vec, const std::string &name){ //... } And this is the class with IshaderParams*: class TShader{ std::vector params; public: Shader effect; std::string technique_name; TShader(std::string& afilename):effect(NULL){}; ~TShader(); void setVector3(const D3DXVECTOR3 &vec, const std::string &name); When I compile the project with Visual Studio C++ Express 2008 I recieve this error: Error 2 error C2440: '=' :can't make the conversion 'void (__thiscall TShader::* )(const D3DXVECTOR3 &,const std::string &)' a 'void (__thiscall TShaderParam::* )(const TParam &,const std::string &)' c:\users\isagoras\documents\mcv\afoc\shader.cpp 127 Can I do the assignment? No? I don't know how :-S Yes, I know that I can achieve the same objective with other techniques, but I want to know how can I do this..

  Read the article

• Modifying reference member from const member function in C++

  - by Philipp

  I am working on const-correctness of my code and just wondered why this code compiles: class X { int x; int& y; public: X(int& _y):y(_y) { } void f(int& newY) const { //x = 3; would not work, that's fine y = newY; //does compile. Why? } }; int main(int argc, char **argv) { int i1=0, i2=0; X myX(i1); myX.f(i2); ... } As far as I understand, f() is changing the object myX, although it says to be const. How can I ensure my compiler complains when I do assign to y? (Visual C++ 2008) Thank a lot!

  Read the article

• How do I use custom member properties for people on my .NET website

  - by Jordan S

  I am trying to make an asp.net website using Visual web dev and C# that accesses data in an SQL database. For my site, I need to be able to save and access additional user properties such as age and gender. I have been playing around with the built in .NET Login tools but I don't understand how to keep track of the additional properties (age, gender...) I could store all the users information in my own database but how do I correlate the users data in my DB to the usernames in the member database that is automatically created?

  Read the article

• Using a member function pointer within a class

  - by neuviemeporte

  Given an example class: class Fred { public: Fred() { func = &Fred::fa; } void run() { int foo, bar; *func(foo,bar); } double fa(int x, int y); double fb(int x, int y); private: double (Fred::*func)(int x, int y); }; I get a compiler error at the line calling the member function through the pointer "*func(foo,bar)", saying: "term does not evaluate to a function taking 2 arguments". What am I doing wrong?

  Read the article

• Why protected superclass member cannot be accessed in a subclass function when passed as an argument

  - by KNoodles

  I get a compile error, which I'm slightly confused about. This is on VS2003. error C2248: 'A::y' : cannot access protected member declared in class 'A' class A { public: A() : x(0), y(0) {} protected: int x; int y; }; class B : public A { public: B() : A(), z(0) {} B(const A& item) : A(), z(1) { x = item.y;} private: int z; }; The problem is with x = item.y; The access is specified as protected. Why doesn't the constructor of class B have access to A::y?

  Read the article

• pointer to const member function typedef

  - by oldcig

  I know it's possible to separate to create a pointer to member function like this struct K { void func() {} }; typedef void FuncType(); typedef FuncType K::* MemFuncType; MemFuncType pF = &K::func; Is there similar way to construct a pointer to a const function? I've tried adding const in various places with no success. I've played around with gcc some and if you do template deduction on something like template <typename Sig, typename Klass> void deduce(Sig Klass::*); It will show Sig with as a function signature with const just tacked on the end. If to do this in code it will complain that you can't have qualifiers on a function type. Seems like it should be possible somehow because the deduction works.

  Read the article

• Defining private static class member

  - by mnn

  class B { /* ... */ }; class A { public: A() { obj = NULL; } private: static B* obj; }; However this produces huge mass of linker errors that symbol obj is unresolved. What's the "correct" way to have such private static class member without these linker errors? Edit: I tried this: B *A::obj = NULL; but I got about same amount of linker errors however this time about already defining A::obj. (LNK2005). Also I get LNK4006 warnings, also about A::obj

  Read the article

• Member Function Pointer not quite right

  - by BlackDuck

  I have a SpecialisedRedBlackTree class that is templated. My Month class is not. In my Month class I have a private member which is an instance of SpecialisedRedBlackTree: SpecialisedRedBlackTree<Day> m_windSpeedTree; As you can see it will take the Day class/object (please correct me on any terms I get wrong). In my Month class, I have a method passing a method function pointer to this method: bool Month::CompareWindSpeed(Day a, Day b) { return ( a.GetData(WIND_SPEED_CODE) < b.GetData(WIND_SPEED_CODE)? true : false); } bool (Month::*myFuncPtr)(Day, Day); myFuncPtr = &Month::CompareWindSpeed; m_windSpeedTree.Insert(dayReading, myFuncPtr); But because I am passing a bool (Day, Day) pointer to a templated class expecting bool (T, T) T being part of this .... template Error 1 error C2664: 'SpecialisedRedBlackTree<T>::Insert' : cannot convert parameter 2 from 'bool (__thiscall Month::* )(Day,Day)' to 'bool (__cdecl *)(T,T)' Any advice?

  Read the article

• handling pointer to member functions within hierachy in C++

  - by anatoli

  Hi, I'm trying to code the following situation: I have a base class providing a framework for handling events. I'm trying to use an array of pointer-to-member-functions for that. It goes as following: class EH { // EventHandler virtual void something(); // just to make sure we get RTTI public: typedef void (EH::*func_t)(); protected: func_t funcs_d[10]; protected: void register_handler(int event_num, func_t f) { funcs_d[event_num] = f; } public: void handle_event(int event_num) { (this->*(funcs_d[event_num]))(); } }; Then the users are supposed to derive other classes from this one and provide handlers: class DEH : public EH { public: typedef void (DEH::*func_t)(); void handle_event_5(); DEH() { func_t f5 = &DEH::handle_event_5; register_handler(5, f5); // doesn't compile ........ } }; This code wouldn't compile, since DEH::func_t cannot be converted to EH::func_t. It makes perfect sense to me. In my case the conversion is safe since the object under this is really DEH. So I'd like to have something like that: void EH::DEH_handle_event_5_wrapper() { DEH *p = dynamic_cast<DEH *>(this); assert(p != NULL); p->handle_event_5(); } and then instead of func_t f5 = &DEH::handle_event_5; register_handler(5, f5); // doesn't compile in DEH::DEH() put register_handler(5, &EH::DEH_handle_event_5_wrapper); So, finally the question (took me long enough...): Is there a way to create those wrappers (like EH::DEH_handle_event_5_wrapper) automatically? Or to do something similar? What other solutions to this situation are out there? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Function pointers to member functions

  - by Jacob

  There are several duplicates of this but nobody explains why I can use a member variable to store the pointer (in FOO) but when I try it with a local variable (in the commented portion of BAR), it's illegal. Could anybody explain this? #include <iostream> using namespace std; class FOO { public: int (FOO::*fptr)(int a, int b); int add_stuff(int a, int b) { return a+b; } void call_adder(int a, int b) { fptr = &FOO::add_stuff; cout<<(this->*fptr)(a,b)<<endl; } }; class BAR { public: int add_stuff(int a, int b) { return a+b; } void call_adder(int a, int b) { //int (BAR::*fptr)(int a, int b); //fptr = &BAR::add_stuff; //cout<<(*fptr)(a,b)<<endl; } }; int main() { FOO test; test.call_adder(10,20); return 0; }

  Read the article

• c++ templates: problem with member specialization

  - by ChAoS

  I am attempting to create a template "AutoClass" that create an arbitrary class with an arbitrary set of members, such as: AutoClass<int,int,double,double> a; a.set(1,1); a.set(0,2); a.set(3,99.7); std::cout << "Hello world! " << a.get(0) << " " << a.get(1) << " " << a.get(3) << std::endl; By now I have an AutoClass with a working "set" member: class nothing {}; template < typename T1 = nothing, typename T2 = nothing, typename T3 = nothing, typename T4 = nothing, typename T5 = nothing, typename T6 = nothing> class AutoClass; template <> class AutoClass<nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing> { public: template <typename U> void set(int n,U v){} }; template < typename T1, typename T2, typename T3, typename T4, typename T5, typename T6> class AutoClass: AutoClass<T2,T3,T4,T5,T6> { public: T1 V; template <typename U> void set(int n,U v) { if (n <= 0) V = v; else AutoClass<T2,T3,T4,T5,T6>::set(n-1,v); } }; and I started to have problems implementing the corresponding "get". This approach doesn't compile: template < typename T1, typename T2, typename T3, typename T4, typename T5, typename T6> class AutoClass: AutoClass<T2,T3,T4,T5,T6> { public: T1 V; template <typename U> void set(int n,U v) { if (n <= 0) V = v; else AutoClass<T2,T3,T4,T5,T6>::set(n-1,v); } template <typename W> W get(int n) { if (n <= 0) return V; else return AutoClass<T2,T3,T4,T5,T6>::get(n-1); } template <> T1 get(int n) { if (n <= 0) return V; else return AutoClass<T2,T3,T4,T5,T6>::get(n-1); } }; Besides, it seems I need to implement get for the <nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing> specialization. Any Idea on how to solve this?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >