Search Results

Search found 32346 results on 1294 pages for 'method overloading'.

Page 2/1294 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• Operator overloading - is it really reasonable to forbid?

  - by Gabriel Šcerbák

  Java forbids operator overloading, but coming from C++ I do not see any reason for that. In languages where operator symbols are symbols as any other, same rules apply to "+" as to"plus" and there is no problem. So what is the point?

  Read the article

• Operator overloading in C++

  - by user265260

  If you overload - like operator-(), it is to be used to the left of the object, however overloading () like operator()() it is used to the right of the object. How do we know which operator is to be used on the left and which ones to be used on the right?

  Read the article

• Simplifying const Overloading?

  - by templatetypedef

  Hello all- I've been teaching a C++ programming class for many years now and one of the trickiest things to explain to students is const overloading. I commonly use the example of a vector-like class and its operator[] function: template <typename T> class Vector { public: T& operator[] (size_t index); const T& operator[] (size_t index) const; }; I have little to no trouble explaining why it is that two versions of the operator[] function are needed, but in trying to explain how to unify the two implementations together I often find myself wasting a lot of time with language arcana. The problem is that the only good, reliable way that I know how to implement one of these functions in terms of the other is with the const_cast/static_cast trick: template <typename T> const T& Vector<T>::operator[] (size_t index) const { /* ... your implementation here ... */ } template <typename T> T& Vector<T>::operator[] (size_t index) { return const_cast<T&>(static_cast<const Vector&>(*this)[index]); } The problem with this setup is that it's extremely tricky to explain and not at all intuitively obvious. When you explain it as "cast to const, then call the const version, then strip off constness" it's a little easier to understand, but the actual syntax is frightening,. Explaining what const_cast is, why it's appropriate here, and why it's almost universally inappropriate elsewhere usually takes me five to ten minutes of lecture time, and making sense of this whole expression often requires more effort than the difference between const T* and T* const. I feel that students need to know about const-overloading and how to do it without needlessly duplicating the code in the two functions, but this trick seems a bit excessive in an introductory C++ programming course. My question is this - is there a simpler way to implement const-overloaded functions in terms of one another? Or is there a simpler way of explaining this existing trick to students? Thanks so much!

  Read the article

• operator overloading c++

  - by segfault

  When overloading operators, is it necessary to overload = <= and !=? It seems like it would be smart for c++ to call !operator= for !=, ! for operator<= and !< for operator=. Is that the case, or is it necessary to overload every function?

  Read the article

• typedef and operator overloading in C

  - by jocapco

  Suppose I typedef an integer or integer array or any known type: typedef int int2 Then I overload operator * for int2 pairs, now if I initialize variables a and b as int. Then will my * between a and b be the overloaded * ? How do I achieve overloading an int and yet also use * for int the way they are. Should I create a new type?

  Read the article

• bug with varargs and overloading?

  - by pstanton

  There seems to be a bug in the Java varargs implementation. Java can't distinguish the appropriate type when a method is overloaded with different types of vararg parameters. It gives me an error The method ... is ambiguous for the type ... Consider the following code: public class Test { public static void main(String[] args) throws Throwable { doit(new int[]{1, 2}); // <- no problem doit(new double[]{1.2, 2.2}); // <- no problem doit(1.2f, 2.2f); // <- no problem doit(1.2d, 2.2d); // <- no problem doit(1, 2); // <- The method doit(double[]) is ambiguous for the type Test } public static void doit(double... ds) { System.out.println("doubles"); } public static void doit(int... is) { System.out.println("ints"); } } the docs say: "Generally speaking, you should not overload a varargs method, or it will be difficult for programmers to figure out which overloading gets called." however they don't mention this error, and it's not the programmers that are finding it difficult, it's the compiler. thoughts?

  Read the article

• constructor function's object literal returns toString() method but no other method

  - by JohnMerlino

  I'm very confused with javascript methods defined in objects and the "this" keyword. In the below example, the toString() method is invoked when Mammal object instantiated: function Mammal(name){ this.name=name; this.toString = function(){ return '[Mammal "'+this.name+'"]'; } } var someAnimal = new Mammal('Mr. Biggles'); alert('someAnimal is '+someAnimal); Despite the fact that the toString() method is not invoked on the object someAnimal like this: alert('someAnimal is '+someAnimal.toString()); It still returns 'someAnimal is [Mammal "Mr. Biggles"]' . That doesn't make sense to me because the toString() function is not being called anywhere. Then to add even more confusion, if I change the toString() method to a method I make up such as random(): function Mammal(name){ this.name=name; this.random = function(){ return Math.floor(Math.random() * 15); } } var someAnimal = new Mammal('Mr. Biggles'); alert(someAnimal); It completely ignores the random method (despite the fact that it is defined the same way was the toString() method was) and returns: [object object] Another issue I'm having trouble understanding with inheritance is the value of "this". For example, in the below example function person(w,h){ width.width = w; width.height = h; } function man(w,h,s) { person.call(this, w, h); this.sex = s; } "this" keyword is being send to the person object clearly. However, does "this" refer to the subclass (man) or the super class (person) when the person object receives it? Thanks for clearing up any of the confusion I have with inheritance and object literals in javascript.

  Read the article

• C# String Operator Overloading

  - by ScottSEA

  G'Day Mates - What is the right way (excluding the argument of whether it is advisable) to overload the string operators <, , <= and = ? I've tried it five ways to Sunday and I get various errors - my best shot was declaring a partial class and overloading from there, but it won't work for some reason. namespace System { public partial class String { public static Boolean operator <(String a, String b) { return a.CompareTo(b) < 0; } public static Boolean operator >(String a, String b) { return a.CompareTo(b) > 0; } } }

  Read the article

• Operator Overloading with C# Extension Methods

  - by Blinky

  I'm attempting to use extension methods to add an operater overload to the C# StringBuilder class. Specifically, given StringBuilder sb, I'd like sb += "text" to become equivalent to sb.Append("text"); Here's the syntax for creating an extension method for StringBuilder: public static class sbExtensions { public static StringBuilder blah(this StringBuilder sb) { return sb; } } It successfully adds the "blah" extension method to the StringBuilder. Unfortunately, operator overloading does not seem to work: public static class sbExtensions { public static StringBuilder operator +(this StringBuilder sb, string s) { return sb.Append(s); } } Among other issues, the keyword 'this' is not allowed in this context. Are adding operator overloads via extension methods possible? If so, what's the proper way to go about it?

  Read the article

• Overloading methods in C#

  - by Craig Johnston

  Is there a way to simplify the process of adding an overloaded method in C# using VS2005? In VB6, I would have just added an Optional parameter the function, but in C# do I have to have to type out a whole new method with this new parameter?

  Read the article

• Overloading the QDataStream << and >> operators for a user-defined type

  - by Alex Wood

  I have a an object I'd like to be able to read and write to/from a QDataStream. The header is as follows: class Compound { public: Compound(QString, QPixmap*, Ui::MainWindow*); void saveCurrentInfo(); void restoreSavedInfo(QGraphicsScene*); void setImage(QPixmap*); QString getName(); private: QString name, homeNotes, addNotes, expText; Ui::MainWindow *gui; QPixmap *image; struct NMRdata { QString hnmrText, cnmrText, hn_nmrText, hn_nmrNucl, notes; int hnmrFreqIndex, cnmrFreqIndex, hn_nmrFreqIndex, hnmrSolvIndex, cnmrSolvIndex, hn_nmrSolvIndex; }*nmr_data; struct IRdata { QString uvConc, lowResMethod, irText, uvText, lowResText, highResText, highResCalc, highResFnd, highResFrmla, notes; int irSolvIndex, uvSolvIndex; }*ir_data; struct PhysicalData { QString mpEdit, bpEdit, mpParensEdit, bpParensEdit, rfEdit, phyText, optAlpha, optConc, elemText, elemFrmla, notes; int phySolvIndex, optSolvIndex; }*physical_data; }; For all intensive purposes, the class just serves as an abstraction for a handful of QStrings and a QPixmap. Ideally, I would be able to write a QList to a QDataStream but I'm not exactly sure how to go about doing this. If operator overloading is a suitable solution, would writing code like friend QDataStream& operator << (QDataStream&,Compound) { ... } be a potential solution? I'm very open to suggestions! Please let me know if any further clarification is needed.

  Read the article

• Implementing Operator Overloading with Logarithms in C++

  - by Jacob Relkin

  Hello my friends, I'm having some issues with implementing a logarithm class with operator overloading in C++. My first goal is how I would implement the changeBase method, I've been having a tough time wrapping my head around it. My secoond goal is to be able to perform an operation where the left operand is a double and the right operand is a logarithm object. Here's a snippet of my log class: // coefficient: double // base: unsigned int // number: double class _log { double coefficient, number; unsigned int base; public: _log() { base = rand(); coefficient = rand(); number = rand(); } _log operator+ ( const double b ) const; _log operator* ( const double b ) const; _log operator- ( const double b ) const; _log operator/ ( const double b ) const; _log operator<< ( const _log &b ); double getValue() const; bool changeBase( unsigned int base ); }; You guys are awesome, thank you for your time.

  Read the article

• Constructor Overloading

  - by Mark Baker

  Normally when I want to create a class constructor that accepts different types of parameters, I'll use a kludgy overloading principle of not defining any args in the constructor definition: e.g. for an ECEF coordinate class constructor, I want it to accept either $x, $y and $z arguments, or to accept a single array argument containg x, y and z values, or to accept a single LatLong object I'd create a constructor looking something like: function __construct() { // Identify if any arguments have been passed to the constructor if (func_num_args() > 0) { $args = func_get_args(); // Identify the overload constructor required, based on the datatype of the first argument $argType = gettype($args[0]); switch($argType) { case 'array' : // Array of Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromArray'; break; case 'object' : // A LatLong object that needs converting to Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromLatLong'; break; default : // Individual Cartesian co-ordinate values $overloadConstructor = 'setCoordinatesFromXYZ'; break; } // Call the appropriate overload constructor call_user_func_array(array($this,$overloadConstructor),$args); } } // function __construct() I'm looking at an alternative: to provide a straight constructor with $x, $y and $z as defined arguments, and to provide static methods of createECEFfromArray() and createECEFfromLatLong() that handle all the necessary extraction of x, y and z; then create a new ECEF object using the standard constructor, and return that Which option is cleaner from an OO purists perspective?

  Read the article

• What is the rationale to not allow overloading of C++ conversions operator with non-member function

  - by Vicente Botet Escriba

  C++0x has added explicit conversion operators, but they must always be defined as members of the Source class. The same applies to the assignment operator, it must be defined on the Target class. When the Source and Target classes of the needed conversion are independent of each other, neither the Source can define a conversion operator, neither the Target can define a constructor from a Source. Usually we get it by defining a specific function such as Target ConvertToTarget(Source& v); If C++0x allowed to overload conversion operator by non member functions we could for example define the conversion implicitly or explicitly between unrelated types. template < typename To, typename From > operator To(const From& val); For example we could specialize the conversion from chrono::time_point to posix_time::ptime as follows template < class Clock, class Duration> operator boost::posix_time::ptime( const boost::chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration>& from) { using namespace boost; typedef chrono::time_point<Clock, Duration> time_point_t; typedef chrono::nanoseconds duration_t; typedef duration_t::rep rep_t; rep_t d = chrono::duration_cast<duration_t>( from.time_since_epoch()).count(); rep_t sec = d/1000000000; rep_t nsec = d%1000000000; return posix_time::from_time_t(0)+ posix_time::seconds(static_cast<long>(sec))+ posix_time::nanoseconds(nsec); } And use the conversion as any other conversion. For a more complete description of the problem, see here or on my Boost.Conversion library.. So the question is: What is the rationale to non allow overloading of C++ conversions operator with non-member functions?

  Read the article

• Member function overloading/template specialization issue

  - by Ferruccio

  I've been trying to call the overloaded table::scan_index(std::string, ...) member function without success. For the sake of clarity, I have stripped out all non-relevant code. I have a class called table which has an overloaded/templated member function named scan_index() in order to handle strings as a special case. class table : boost::noncopyable { public: template <typename T> void scan_index(T val, std::function<bool (uint recno, T val)> callback) { // code } void scan_index(std::string val, std::function<bool (uint recno, std::string val)> callback) { // code } }; Then there is a hitlist class which has a number of templated member functions which call table::scan_index(T, ...) class hitlist { public: template <typename T> void eq(uint fieldno, T value) { table* index_table = db.get_index_table(fieldno); // code index_table->scan_index<T>(value, [&](uint recno, T n)->bool { // code }); } }; And, finally, the code which kicks it all off: hitlist hl; // code hl.eq<std::string>(*fieldno, p1.to_string()); The problem is that instead of calling table::scan_index(std::string, ...), it calls the templated version. I have tried using both overloading (as shown above) and a specialized function template (below), but nothing seems to work. After staring at this code for a few hours, I feel like I'm missing something obvious. Any ideas? template <> void scan_index<std::string>(std::string val, std::function<bool (uint recno, std::string val)> callback) { // code }

  Read the article

• Recursion problem overloading an operator

  - by Tronfi

  I have this: typedef string domanin_name; And then, I try to overload the operator< in this way: bool operator<(const domain_name & left, const domain_name & right){ int pos_label_left = left.find_last_of('.'); int pos_label_right = right.find_last_of('.'); string label_left = left.substr(pos_label_left); string label_right = right.substr(pos_label_right); int last_pos_label_left=0, last_pos_label_right=0; while(pos_label_left!=string::npos && pos_label_right!=string::npos){ if(label_left<label_right) return true; else if(label_left>label_right) return false; else{ last_pos_label_left = pos_label_left; last_pos_label_right = pos_label_right; pos_label_left = left.find_last_of('.', last_pos_label_left); pos_label_right = right.find_last_of('.', last_pos_label_left); label_left = left.substr(pos_label_left, last_pos_label_left); label_right = right.substr(pos_label_right, last_pos_label_right); } } } I know it's a strange way to overload the operator <, but I have to do it this way. It should do what I want. That's not the point. The problem is that it enter in an infinite loop right in this line: if(label_left<label_right) return true; It seems like it's trying to use this overloading function itself to do the comparision, but label_left is a string, not a domain name! Any suggestion?

  Read the article

• Method chaining and exceptions in C#

  - by devoured elysium

  If I have a method chain like the following: var abc = new ABC(); abc.method1() .method2() .methodThrowsException() .method3() ; assuming I've defined method1(), method2() and method3() as public ABC method1() { return this; } and methodThrowsException() as public ABC method3() { throw new ArgumentException(); } When running the code, is it possible to know which specific line of code has thrown the Exception, or will it just consider all the method chaining as just one line? I've done a simple test and it seems it considers them all as just one line but Method Chaining says Putting methods on separate lines also makes debugging easier as error messages and debugger control is usually on a line by line basis. Am I missing something, or does that just not apply to C#? Thanks

  Read the article

• alias_attribute and creating and method with the original attribute name causes a loop

  - by Tiago

  Im trying to dynamically create a method chain in one attribute in my model. By now I have this function: def create_filtered_attribute(attribute_name) alias_attribute "#{attribute_name}_without_filter", attribute_name define_method "#{attribute_name}" do filter_words(self.send("#{attribute_name}_without_filter")) end end so I receive a string with the attribute name, alias it for '*_without_filter*' (alias_method or alias_method_chain fails here, because the attribute isnt there when the class is created), and I create a new method with the attribute name, where I filter its contents. But somehow, when I call *"#{attribute_name}_without_filter"* it calls my new method (i think because the alias_attribute some how), and the program goes into a stack loop. Can someone please enlighten me on this.

  Read the article

• Const operator overloading problems in C++

  - by steigers

  Hello everybody, I'm having trouble with overloading operator() with a const version: #include <iostream> #include <vector> using namespace std; class Matrix { public: Matrix(int m, int n) { vector<double> tmp(m, 0.0); data.resize(n, tmp); } ~Matrix() { } const double & operator()(int ii, int jj) const { cout << " - const-version was called - "; return data[ii][jj]; } double & operator()(int ii, int jj) { cout << " - NONconst-version was called - "; if (ii!=1) { throw "Error: you may only alter the first row of the matrix."; } return data[ii][jj]; } protected: vector< vector<double> > data; }; int main() { try { Matrix A(10,10); A(1,1) = 8.8; cout << "A(1,1)=" << A(1,1) << endl; cout << "A(2,2)=" << A(2,2) << endl; double tmp = A(3,3); } catch (const char* c) { cout << c << endl; } } This gives me the following output: NONconst-version was called - - NONconst-version was called - A(1,1)=8.8 NONconst-version was called - Error: you may only alter the first row of the matrix. How can I achieve that C++ call the const-version of operator()? I am using GCC 4.4.0. Thanks for your help! Sebastian

  Read the article

• new and delete operator overloading

  - by Angus

  I am writing a simple program to understand the new and delete operator overloading. How is the size parameter passed into the new operator? For reference, here is my code: #include<iostream> #include<stdlib.h> #include<malloc.h> using namespace std; class loc{ private: int longitude,latitude; public: loc(){ longitude = latitude = 0; } loc(int lg,int lt){ longitude -= lg; latitude -= lt; } void show(){ cout << "longitude" << endl; cout << "latitude" << endl; } void* operator new(size_t size); void operator delete(void* p); void* operator new[](size_t size); void operator delete[](void* p); }; void* loc :: operator new(size_t size){ void* p; cout << "In overloaded new" << endl; p = malloc(size); cout << "size :" << size << endl; if(!p){ bad_alloc ba; throw ba; } return p; } void loc :: operator delete(void* p){ cout << "In delete operator" << endl; free(p); } void* loc :: operator new[](size_t size){ void* p; cout << "In overloaded new[]" << endl; p = malloc(size); cout << "size :" << size << endl; if(!p){ bad_alloc ba; throw ba; } return p; } void loc :: operator delete[](void* p){ cout << "In delete operator - array" << endl; free(p); } int main(){ loc *p1,*p2; int i; cout << "sizeof(loc)" << sizeof(loc) << endl; try{ p1 = new loc(10,20); } catch (bad_alloc ba){ cout << "Allocation error for p1" << endl; return 1; } try{ p2 = new loc[10]; } catch(bad_alloc ba){ cout << "Allocation error for p2" << endl; return 1; } p1->show(); for(i = 0;i < 10;i++){ p2[i].show(); } delete p1; delete[] p2; return 0; }

  Read the article

• Does C# allow method overloading, PHP style (__call)?

  - by mr.b

  In PHP, there is a special method named __call($calledMethodName, $arguments), which allows class to catch calls to non-existing methods, and do something about it. Since most of classic languages are strongly typed, compiler won't allow calling a method that does not exist, I'm clear with that part. What I want to accomplish (and I figured this is how I would do it in PHP, but C# is something else) is to proxy calls to a class methods and log each of these calls. Right now, I have code similar to this: class ProxyClass { static logger; public AnotherClass inner { get; private set; } public ProxyClass() { inner = new AnotherClass(); } } class AnotherClass { public void A() {} public void B() {} public void C() {} // ... } // meanwhile, in happyCodeLandia... ProxyClass pc = new ProxyClass(); pc.inner.A(); pc.inner.B(); // ... So, how can I proxy calls to an object instance in extensible way? Extensible, meaning that I don't have to modify ProxyClass whenever AnotherClass changes. In my case, AnotherClass can have any number of methods, so it wouldn't be appropriate to overload or wrap all methods to add logging. I am aware that this might not be the best approach for this kind of problem, so if anyone has idea what approach to use, shoot. Thanks!

  Read the article

• C++ function overloading and dynamic binding compile problem

  - by Olorin

  #include <iostream> using namespace std; class A { public: virtual void foo(void) const { cout << "A::foo(void)" << endl; } virtual void foo(int i) const { cout << i << endl; } virtual ~A() {} }; class B : public A { public: void foo(int i) const { this->foo(); cout << i << endl; } }; class C : public B { public: void foo(void) const { cout << "C::foo(void)" << endl; } }; int main(int argc, char ** argv) { C test; test.foo(45); return 0; } The above code does not compile with: $>g++ test.cpp -o test.exe test.cpp: In member function 'virtual void B::foo(int) const': test.cpp:17: error: no matching function for call to 'B::foo() const' test.cpp:17: note: candidates are: virtual void B::foo(int) const test.cpp: In function 'int main(int, char**)': test.cpp:31: error: no matching function for call to 'C::foo(int)' test.cpp:23: note: candidates are: virtual void C::foo() const It compiles if method "foo(void)" is changed to "goo(void)". Why is this so? Is it possible to compile the code without changing the method name of "foo(void)"? Thanks.

  Read the article

• Binary operator overloading on a templated class (C++)

  - by GRB

  Hi all, I was recently trying to gauge my operator overloading/template abilities and as a small test, created the Container class below. While this code compiles fine and works correctly under MSVC 2008 (displays 11), both MinGW/GCC and Comeau choke on the operator+ overload. As I trust them more than MSVC, I'm trying to figure out what I'm doing wrong. Here is the code: #include <iostream> using namespace std; template <typename T> class Container { friend Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs); public: void setobj(T ob); T getobj(); private: T obj; }; template <typename T> void Container<T>::setobj(T ob) { obj = ob; } template <typename T> T Container<T>::getobj() { return obj; } template <typename T> Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs) { Container<T> temp; temp.obj = lhs.obj + rhs.obj; return temp; } int main() { Container<int> a, b; a.setobj(5); b.setobj(6); Container<int> c = a + b; cout << c.getobj() << endl; return 0; } This is the error Comeau gives: Comeau C/C++ 4.3.10.1 (Oct 6 2008 11:28:09) for ONLINE_EVALUATION_BETA2 Copyright 1988-2008 Comeau Computing. All rights reserved. MODE:strict errors C++ C++0x_extensions "ComeauTest.c", line 27: error: an explicit template argument list is not allowed on this declaration Container<T> operator+ <> (Container<T>& lhs, Container<T>& rhs) ^ 1 error detected in the compilation of "ComeauTest.c". I'm having a hard time trying to get Comeau/MingGW to play ball, so that's where I turn to you guys. It's been a long time since my brain has melted this much under the weight of C++ syntax, so I feel a little embarrassed ;). Thanks in advance. EDIT: Eliminated an (irrelevant) lvalue error listed in initial Comeau dump.

  Read the article

• Polynomial division overloading operator (solved)

  - by Vlad

  Ok. here's the operations i successfully code so far thank's to your help: Adittion: polinom operator+(const polinom& P) const { polinom Result; constIter i = poly.begin(), j = P.poly.begin(); while (i != poly.end() && j != P.poly.end()) { //logic while both iterators are valid if (i->pow > j->pow) { //if the current term's degree of the first polynomial is bigger Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow); i++; } else if (j->pow > i->pow) { // if the other polynomial's term degree is bigger Result.insert(j->coef, j->pow); j++; } else { // if both are equal Result.insert(i->coef + j->coef, i->pow); i++; j++; } } //handle the remaining items in each list //note: at least one will be equal to end(), but that loop will simply be skipped while (i != poly.end()) { Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow); ++i; } while (j != P.poly.end()) { Result.insert(j->coef, j->pow); ++j; } return Result; } Subtraction: polinom operator-(const polinom& P) const //fixed prototype re. const-correctness { polinom Result; constIter i = poly.begin(), j = P.poly.begin(); while (i != poly.end() && j != P.poly.end()) { //logic while both iterators are valid if (i->pow > j->pow) { //if the current term's degree of the first polynomial is bigger Result.insert(-(i->coef), i->pow); i++; } else if (j->pow > i->pow) { // if the other polynomial's term degree is bigger Result.insert(-(j->coef), j->pow); j++; } else { // if both are equal Result.insert(i->coef - j->coef, i->pow); i++; j++; } } //handle the remaining items in each list //note: at least one will be equal to end(), but that loop will simply be skipped while (i != poly.end()) { Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow); ++i; } while (j != P.poly.end()) { Result.insert(j->coef, j->pow); ++j; } return Result; } Multiplication: polinom operator*(const polinom& P) const { polinom Result; constIter i, j, lastItem = Result.poly.end(); Iter it1, it2, first, last; int nr_matches; for (i = poly.begin() ; i != poly.end(); i++) { for (j = P.poly.begin(); j != P.poly.end(); j++) Result.insert(i->coef * j->coef, i->pow + j->pow); } Result.poly.sort(SortDescending()); lastItem--; while (true) { nr_matches = 0; for (it1 = Result.poly.begin(); it1 != lastItem; it1++) { first = it1; last = it1; first++; for (it2 = first; it2 != Result.poly.end(); it2++) { if (it2->pow == it1->pow) { it1->coef += it2->coef; nr_matches++; } } nr_matches++; do { last++; nr_matches--; } while (nr_matches != 0); Result.poly.erase(first, last); } if (nr_matches == 0) break; } return Result; } Division(Edited): polinom operator/(const polinom& P) const { polinom Result, temp2; polinom temp = *this; Iter i = temp.poly.begin(); constIter j = P.poly.begin(); int resultSize = 0; if (temp.poly.size() < 2) { if (i->pow >= j->pow) { Result.insert(i->coef / j->coef, i->pow - j->pow); temp = temp - Result * P; } else { Result.insert(0, 0); } } else { while (true) { if (i->pow >= j->pow) { Result.insert(i->coef / j->coef, i->pow - j->pow); if (Result.poly.size() < 2) temp2 = Result; else { temp2 = Result; resultSize = Result.poly.size(); for (int k = 1 ; k != resultSize; k++) temp2.poly.pop_front(); } temp = temp - temp2 * P; } else break; } } return Result; } }; The first three are working correctly but division doesn't as it seems the program is in a infinite loop. Final Update After listening to Dave, I finally made it by overloading both / and & to return the quotient and the remainder so thanks a lot everyone for your help and especially you Dave for your great idea! P.S. If anyone wants for me to post these 2 overloaded operator please ask it by commenting on my post (and maybe give a vote up for everyone involved).

  Read the article

• Polynomial division overloading operator

  - by Vlad

  Ok. here's the operations i successfully code so far thank's to your help: Adittion: polinom operator+(const polinom& P) const { polinom Result; constIter i = poly.begin(), j = P.poly.begin(); while (i != poly.end() && j != P.poly.end()) { //logic while both iterators are valid if (i->pow > j->pow) { //if the current term's degree of the first polynomial is bigger Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow); i++; } else if (j->pow > i->pow) { // if the other polynomial's term degree is bigger Result.insert(j->coef, j->pow); j++; } else { // if both are equal Result.insert(i->coef + j->coef, i->pow); i++; j++; } } //handle the remaining items in each list //note: at least one will be equal to end(), but that loop will simply be skipped while (i != poly.end()) { Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow); ++i; } while (j != P.poly.end()) { Result.insert(j->coef, j->pow); ++j; } return Result; } Subtraction: polinom operator-(const polinom& P) const //fixed prototype re. const-correctness { polinom Result; constIter i = poly.begin(), j = P.poly.begin(); while (i != poly.end() && j != P.poly.end()) { //logic while both iterators are valid if (i->pow > j->pow) { //if the current term's degree of the first polynomial is bigger Result.insert(-(i->coef), i->pow); i++; } else if (j->pow > i->pow) { // if the other polynomial's term degree is bigger Result.insert(-(j->coef), j->pow); j++; } else { // if both are equal Result.insert(i->coef - j->coef, i->pow); i++; j++; } } //handle the remaining items in each list //note: at least one will be equal to end(), but that loop will simply be skipped while (i != poly.end()) { Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow); ++i; } while (j != P.poly.end()) { Result.insert(j->coef, j->pow); ++j; } return Result; } Multiplication: polinom operator*(const polinom& P) const { polinom Result; constIter i, j, lastItem = Result.poly.end(); Iter it1, it2, first, last; int nr_matches; for (i = poly.begin() ; i != poly.end(); i++) { for (j = P.poly.begin(); j != P.poly.end(); j++) Result.insert(i->coef * j->coef, i->pow + j->pow); } Result.poly.sort(SortDescending()); lastItem--; while (true) { nr_matches = 0; for (it1 = Result.poly.begin(); it1 != lastItem; it1++) { first = it1; last = it1; first++; for (it2 = first; it2 != Result.poly.end(); it2++) { if (it2->pow == it1->pow) { it1->coef += it2->coef; nr_matches++; } } nr_matches++; do { last++; nr_matches--; } while (nr_matches != 0); Result.poly.erase(first, last); } if (nr_matches == 0) break; } return Result; } Division(Edited): polinom operator/(const polinom& P) { polinom Result, temp; Iter i = poly.begin(); constIter j = P.poly.begin(); if (poly.size() < 2) { if (i->pow >= j->pow) { Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow - j->pow); *this = *this - Result; } } else { while (true) { if (i->pow >= j->pow) { Result.insert(i->coef, i->pow - j->pow); temp = Result * P; *this = *this - temp; } else break; } } return Result; } The first three are working correctly but division doesn't as it seems the program is in a infinite loop. Update Because no one seems to understand how i thought the algorithm, i'll explain: If the dividend contains only one term, we simply insert the quotient in Result, then we multiply it with the divisor ans subtract it from the first polynomial which stores the remainder. If the polynomial we do this until the second polynomial( P in this case) becomes bigger. I think this algorithm is called long division, isn't it? So based on these, can anyone help me with overloading the / operator correctly for my class? Thanks!

  Read the article

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