Search Results

Search found 1281 results on 52 pages for 'stl containers'.

Page 2/52 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Can I disable min, max in STL?

    - by P-P
    Hi, I use one library which is very important and untouchable. The problem is that library declare min, max function, so when I include STL header in project, they conflict. I want to disable min, max function in STL (like #define NOMNMAX) if I could. If I can't, what would be solution? Thanks, in advance.

    Read the article

  • Version of STL optimized for compile time?

    - by anon
    Hi! I'm looking for a variant of the STL (it's okay if it doesn't have all the functionality) that's optimized for short compile times -- I get bothered by long compile times that delay my compile-debug-edit cycle. I'm mainly interested in the containers of the STL: vector/map, and not so much the algorithms. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • stl priority queue based on lower value first

    - by russell
    I have a problem with stl priority queue.I want to have the priority queue in the increasing order,which is decreasing by default.Is there any way to do this in priority queue. And what is the complexity of building stl priority queue.If i use quick sort in an array which takes O(nlgn) is its complexity is similar to using priority queue??? Plz someone ans.Advanced thanx.

    Read the article

  • STL container to pop() by priority?

    - by Pirate for Profit
    I'm writing a thread-pool for Qt as QRunnable doesn't handle event loops in new threads. Not too familiar with STL, what would be the best way to pop() something by priority? Priority should probably be a property of MyRunnable imo, but I can always give that info to an STL container when adding the runnable to the queue.

    Read the article

  • why no += operator for vectors in stl

    - by Akshay Bhat
    I am curious? What high fundu logic goes behind not implementing: result+=vector1; where both result and vector1 are stl vectors. Note: i know how to implement that bit, but i need to know what logic, the sages who designed STL were using when they chose not to implement this feature?

    Read the article

  • How much of STL is too much?

    - by Darius Kucinskas
    I am using a lot of STL code with std::for_each, bind, and so on, but I noticed that sometimes STL usage is not good idea. For example if you have a std::vector and want to do one action on each item of the vector, your first idea is to use this: std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), Foo()) and it is elegant and ok, for a while. But then comes the first set of bug reports and you have to modify code. Now you should add parameter to call Foo(), so now it becomes: std::for_each(vec.begin(), vec.end(), std::bind2nd(Foo(), X)) but that is only temporary solution. Now the project is maturing and you understand business logic much better and you want to add new modifications to code. It is at this point that you realize that you should use old good: for(std::vector::iterator it = vec.begin(); it != vec.end(); ++it) Is this happening only to me? Do you recognise this kind of pattern in your code? Have you experience similar anti-patterns using STL?

    Read the article

  • How do you use stl's functions like for_each?

    - by thomas-gies
    I started using stl containers because they came in very handy when I needed functionality of a list, set and map and had nothing else available in my programming environment. I did not care much about the ideas behind it. STL documentations were only interesting up to the point where it came to functions, etc. Then I skipped reading and just used the containers. But yesterday, still being relaxed from my holidays, I just gave it a try and wanted to go a bit more the stl way. So I used the transform function (can I have a little bit of applause for me, thank you). From an academic point of view it really looked interesting and it worked. But the thing that boroughs me is that if you intensify the use of those functions, you need 10ks of helper classes for mostly everything you want to do in your code. The hole logic of the program is sliced in tiny pieces. This slicing is not the result of god coding habits. It's just a technical need. Something, that makes my life probably harder not easier. And I learned the hard way, that you should always choose the simplest approach that solves the problem at hand. And I can't see what, for example, the for_each function is doing for me that justifies the use of a helper class over several simple lines of code that sit inside a normal loop so that everybody can see what is going on. I would like to know, what you are thinking about my concerns? Did you see it like I do when you started working this way and have changed your mind when you got used to it? Are there benefits that I overlooked? Or do you just ignore this stuff as I did (and will go an doing it, probably). Thanks. PS: I know that there is a real for_each loop in boost. But I ignore it here since it is just a convenient way for my usual loops with iterators I guess.

    Read the article

  • Is the STL efficient enough for mobile devices?

    - by mx2
    When it comes to mobile game development on iOS and Android NDK, some developers write their own C++ containers, while others claim that STL is more than adequate for mobile game development (For example, the author of iPhone 3D Programming uses STL rather than Objective-C in his examples. His defense is that STL is no slower than Objective-C). Then there are also mobile developers who abandon C++ entirely and develop games entirely (or mostly) in the C language (C89/C90). What are the benefits and drawbacks of each approach?

    Read the article

  • Indices instead of pointers in STL containers?

    - by zvrba
    Due to specific requirements [*], I need a singly-linked list implementation that uses integer indices instead of pointers to link nodes. The indices are always interpreted with respect to a vector containing the list nodes. I thought I might achieve this by defining my own allocator, but looking into the gcc's implementation of , they explicitly use pointers for the link fields in the list nodes (i.e., they do not use the pointer type provided by the allocator): struct _List_node_base { _List_node_base* _M_next; ///< Self-explanatory _List_node_base* _M_prev; ///< Self-explanatory ... } (For this purpose, the allocator interface is also deficient in that it does not define a dereference function; "dereferencing" an integer index always needs a pointer to the underlying storage.) Do you know a library of STL-like data structures (i am mostly in need of singly- and doubly-linked list) that use indices (wrt. a base vector) instead of pointers to link nodes? [*] Saving space: the lists will contain many 32-bit integers. With two pointers per node (STL list is doubly-linked), the overhead is 200%, or 400% on 64-bit platform, not counting the overhead of the default allocator.

    Read the article

  • C++ STL question related to insert iterators and overloaded operators

    - by rshepherd
    #include <list> #include <set> #include <iterator> #include <algorithm> using namespace std; class MyContainer { public: string value; MyContainer& operator=(const string& s) { this->value = s; return *this; } }; int main() { list<string> strings; strings.push_back("0"); strings.push_back("1"); strings.push_back("2"); set<MyContainer> containers; copy(strings.begin(), strings.end(), inserter(containers, containers.end())); } The preceeding code does not compile. In standard C++ fashion the error output is verbose and difficult to understand. The key part seems to be this... /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algobase.h:313: error: no match for ‘operator=’ in ‘__result.std::insert_iterator::operator* [with _Container = std::set, std::allocator ]() = __first.std::_List_iterator::operator* [with _Tp = std::basic_string, std::allocator ]()’ ...which I interpet to mean that the assignment operator needed is not defined. I took a look at the source code for insert_iterator and noted that it has overloaded the assignment operator. The copy algorithm must uses the insert iterators overloaded assignment operator to do its work(?). I guess that because my input iterator is on a container of strings and my output iterator is on a container of MyContainers that the overloaded insert_iterator assignment operator can no longer work. This is my best guess, but I am probably wrong. So, why exactly does this not work and how can I accomplish what I am trying to do?

    Read the article

  • C++ STL question related to insert iterators and sets

    - by rshepherd
    #include #include #include #include using namespace std; class MyContainer { public: string value; MyContainer& operator=(const string& s) { this->value = s; return *this; } }; int main() { list<string> strings; strings.push_back("0"); strings.push_back("1"); strings.push_back("2"); set<MyContainer> containers; copy(strings.begin(), strings.end(), inserter(containers, containers.end())); } The preceeding code does not compile. In typical STL style the error output is verbose and difficult to understand. The key part seems to be this... /usr/include/c++/4.4/bits/stl_algobase.h:313: error: no match for ‘operator=’ in ‘__result.std::insert_iterator::operator* [with _Container = std::set, std::allocator ]() = __first.std::_List_iterator::operator* [with _Tp = std::basic_string, std::allocator ]()’ ...which I interpet to mean that the assignment operator needed is not defined. I took a look at the source code for insert_iterator and noted that it has overloaded the assignment operator. The copy algorithm must uses the insert iterators overloaded assignment operator to do its work(?). I guess that because my input iterator is on a container of strings and my output iterator is on a container of MyContainers that the overloaded insert_iterator assignment operator can no longer work. This is my best guess, but I am probably wrong. So, why exactly does this not work and how can I accomplish what I am trying to do?

    Read the article

  • Using STL/Boost to initialize a hard-coded set<vector<int> >

    - by Hooked
    Like this question already asked, I'd like to initialize a container using STL where the elements are hard-coded in the cleanest manner possible. In this case, the elements are a doubly nested container: set<vector<int> > A; And I'd like (for example) to put the following values in: A = [[0,0,1],[0,1,0],[1,0,0],[0,0,0]]; C++0x fine, using g++ 4.4.1. STL is preferable as I don't use Boost for any other parts of the code (though I wouldn't mind an example with it!).

    Read the article

  • What is better, a STL list or a STL Map for 20 entries, considering order of insertion is as importa

    - by Abhijeet
    I have the following scenario.The implementation is required for a real time application. 1)I need to store at max 20 entries in a container(STL Map, STL List etc). 2)If a new entry comes and 20 entries are already present i have to overwrite the oldest entry with the new entry. Considering point 2, i feel if the container is full (Max 20 entries) 'list' is the best bet as i can always remove the first entry in the list and add the new one at last (push_back). However, search won't be as efficient. For only 20 entries, does it really make a big difference in terms of searching efficiency if i use a list in place of a map? Also considering the cost of insertion in map i feel i should go for a list? Could you please tell what is a better bet for me ?

    Read the article

  • STL operator= behavior change with Visual Studio 2010?

    - by augnob
    Hi, I am attempting to compile QtScriptGenerator (gitorious) with Visual Studio 2010 (C++) and have run into a compile error. In searching for a solution, I have seen occasional references to compile breakages introduced since VS2008 due to changes in VS2010's implementation of STL and/or c++0x conformance changes. Any ideas what is happening below, or how I could go about fixing it? If the offending code appeared to be QtScriptGenerator's, I think I would have an easier time fixing it.. but it appears to me that the offending code may be in VS2010's STL implementation and I may be required to create a workaround? PS. I am pretty unfamiliar with templates and STL. I have a background in embedded and console projects where such things have until recently often been avoided to reduce memory consumption and cross-compiler risks. C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\INCLUDE\xutility(275) : error C2679: binary '=' : no operator found which takes a right-hand operand of type 'rpp::pp_output_iterator<_Container>' (or there is no acceptable conversion) with [ _Container=std::string ] c:\qt\qtscriptgenerator\generator\parser\rpp\pp-iterator.h(75): could be 'rpp::pp_output_iterator<_Container> &rpp::pp_output_iterator<_Container>::operator =(const char &)' with [ _Container=std::string ] while trying to match the argument list '(rpp::pp_output_iterator<_Container>, rpp::pp_output_iterator<_Container>)' with [ _Container=std::string ] C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\INCLUDE\xutility(2176) : see reference to function template instantiation '_Iter &std::_Rechecked<_OutIt,_OutIt>(_Iter &,_UIter)' being compiled with [ _Iter=rpp::pp_output_iterator<std::string>, _OutIt=rpp::pp_output_iterator<std::string>, _UIter=rpp::pp_output_iterator<std::string> ] c:\qt\qtscriptgenerator\generator\parser\rpp\pp-internal.h(83) : see reference to function template instantiation '_OutIt std::copy<std::_String_iterator<_Elem,_Traits,_Alloc>,_OutputIterator>(_InIt,_InIt,_OutIt)' being compiled with [ _OutIt=rpp::pp_output_iterator<std::string>, _Elem=char, _Traits=std::char_traits<char>, _Alloc=std::allocator<char>, _OutputIterator=rpp::pp_output_iterator<std::string>, _InIt=std::_String_iterator<char,std::char_traits<char>,std::allocator<char>> ] c:\qt\qtscriptgenerator\generator\parser\rpp\pp-engine-bits.h(500) : see reference to function template instantiation 'void rpp::_PP_internal::output_line<_OutputIterator>(const std::string &,int,_OutputIterator)' being compiled with [ _OutputIterator=rpp::pp_output_iterator<std::string> ] C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio 10.0\VC\INCLUDE\xutility(275) : error C2582: 'operator =' function is unavailable in 'rpp::pp_output_iterator<_Container>' with [ _Container=std::string ] Here's some context.. pp-internal.h-- #ifndef PP_INTERNAL_H #define PP_INTERNAL_H #include <algorithm> #include <stdio.h> namespace rpp { namespace _PP_internal { .. 68 template <typename _OutputIterator> 69 void output_line(const std::string &__filename, int __line, _OutputIterator __result) 70 { 71 std::string __msg; 72 73 __msg += "# "; 74 75 char __line_descr[16]; 76 pp_snprintf (__line_descr, 16, "%d", __line); 77 __msg += __line_descr; 78 79 __msg += " \""; 80 81 if (__filename.empty ()) 82 __msg += "<internal>"; 83 else 84 __msg += __filename; 85 86 __msg += "\"\n"; 87 std::copy (__msg.begin (), __msg.end (), __result); 88 }

    Read the article

  • STL find performs bettern than hand-crafter loop

    - by dusha
    Hello all, I have some question. Given the following C++ code fragment: #include <boost/progress.hpp> #include <vector> #include <algorithm> #include <numeric> #include <iostream> struct incrementor { incrementor() : curr_() {} unsigned int operator()() { return curr_++; } private: unsigned int curr_; }; template<class Vec> char const* value_found(Vec const& v, typename Vec::const_iterator i) { return i==v.end() ? "no" : "yes"; } template<class Vec> typename Vec::const_iterator find1(Vec const& v, typename Vec::value_type val) { return find(v.begin(), v.end(), val); } template<class Vec> typename Vec::const_iterator find2(Vec const& v, typename Vec::value_type val) { for(typename Vec::const_iterator i=v.begin(), end=v.end(); i<end; ++i) if(*i==val) return i; return v.end(); } int main() { using namespace std; typedef vector<unsigned int>::const_iterator iter; vector<unsigned int> vec; vec.reserve(10000000); boost::progress_timer pt; generate_n(back_inserter(vec), vec.capacity(), incrementor()); //added this line, to avoid any doubts, that compiler is able to // guess the data is sorted random_shuffle(vec.begin(), vec.end()); cout << "value generation required: " << pt.elapsed() << endl; double d; pt.restart(); iter found=find1(vec, vec.capacity()); d=pt.elapsed(); cout << "first search required: " << d << endl; cout << "first search found value: " << value_found(vec, found)<< endl; pt.restart(); found=find2(vec, vec.capacity()); d=pt.elapsed(); cout << "second search required: " << d << endl; cout << "second search found value: " << value_found(vec, found)<< endl; return 0; } On my machine (Intel i7, Windows Vista) STL find (call via find1) runs about 10 times faster than the hand-crafted loop (call via find2). I first thought that Visual C++ performs some kind of vectorization (may be I am mistaken here), but as far as I can see assembly does not look the way it uses vectorization. Why is STL loop faster? Hand-crafted loop is identical to the loop from the STL-find body. I was asked to post program's output. Without shuffle: value generation required: 0.078 first search required: 0.008 first search found value: no second search required: 0.098 second search found value: no With shuffle (caching effects): value generation required: 1.454 first search required: 0.009 first search found value: no second search required: 0.044 second search found value: no Many thanks, dusha. P.S. I return the iterator and write out the result (found or not), because I would like to prevent compiler optimization, that it thinks the loop is not required at all. The searched value is obviously not in the vector.

    Read the article

  • Iteration through std containers in openmp

    - by Sasun Hambardzumyan
    Hi, people. I try to use openmp for multithreading the loop through std::set. When I write the following code - #pragma omp parallel for for (std::set<A>::const_iterator i = s.begin(); i != s.end(); ++i) { const A a = *i; operate(a); } I get an error - error: invalid type for iteration variable 'i' error: invalid controlling predicate error: invalid increment expression. So is there an another way to correct iteration in std containers using openmp? There is a workaround to use int i and iterate from 0 to s.size() and using iterator inside a loop body, but this is not looks good.

    Read the article

  • Could the assign function for containers possibly overflow?

    - by Kristo
    I ran into this question today and thought I should post it for the community's reference and/or opinions. The standard C++ containers vector, deque, list, and string provide an assign member function. There are two versions; I'm primarily interested in the one accepting an iterator range. The Josuttis book is a little ambiguous with its description. From p. 237... Assigns all elements of the range [beg,end); this is, is replaces all existing elements with copies of the elements of [beg,end). It doesn't say what happens if the size of the assignee container is different from the range being assigned. Does it truncate? Does it automagically expand? Is it undefined behavior?

    Read the article

  • Is there stl and utf8 friendly C++ Wrapper for ICU, or other powerful unicode library

    - by artyom
    Hello, I need a good Unicode library for C++. I need Transformations in Unicode sensitive way. For example sort all strings in case insensitive way and get their first characters for index. Convert to upper and to lower various Unicode strings. Split text in reasonable position -- words that would work for Chinese and Japanese as well. Formatting numbers, dates in locale sensitive way (should be thread safe). Transparent support of utf8 (primary internal representation). As far as I know the best library is ICU. However, I can't find normal developer friendly API documentation with examples. Also as far as I see, it is not too friendly with modern C++ design, work with STL and so on. Like this std::string msg; unistring umsg.from_utf8(msg); unistring::word_iterator wi; for(wi=umsg.words().begin(),n=0;wi!=usmg.words().wi_end(),n<10;++wi,++n) ; msg=umsg.substr(umsg.words().begin(),wi).to_utf8(); cout<<_("Five 10 words are ")<<msg; Does anybody know good STL friendly ICU wrapper released under Open Source license preferred permissive like MIT or Boost, but others LGPLv2 compatible are ok as well. Is there another high quality library similar to ICU? Platform: UNIX/POSIX, Windows support is not required. Thanks, Artyom Edit: Unfortunatly I wasn't logged in so I can't make asnver accepted... I had attached the ansver by myself.

    Read the article

  • STL vectors with uninitialized storage?

    - by Jim Hunziker
    I'm writing an inner loop that needs to place structs in contiguous storage. I don't know how many of these structs there will be ahead of time. My problem is that STL's vector initializes its values to 0, so no matter what I do, I incur the cost of the initialization plus the cost of setting the struct's members to their values. Is there any way to prevent the initialization, or is there an STL-like container out there with resizeable contiguous storage and uninitialized elements? (I'm certain that this part of the code needs to be optimized, and I'm certain that the initialization is a significant cost.) Also, see my comments below for a clarification about when the initialization occurs. SOME CODE: void GetsCalledALot(int* data1, int* data2, int count) { int mvSize = memberVector.size() memberVector.resize(mvSize + count); // causes 0-initialization for (int i = 0; i < count; ++i) { memberVector[mvSize + i].d1 = data1[i]; memberVector[mvSize + i].d2 = data2[i]; } }

    Read the article

  • fgets throwing unhandled exception while parsing stl

    - by user3478400
    I am new to c++, I am trying to parse a stl file which is of about 64MB and has about ~18K lines in it. The code works fine for first few 100 lines but then fgets throws following exception: "Unhandled exception at 0x77B0BAC5 (ntdll.dll) in STLparser.exe: 0xC0000024: There is a mismatch between the type of object required by the requested operation and the type of object that is specified in the request." I have checked manually the line for which fgets throws exception, there is nothing out of ordinary there. I am out of options for now. Any help to fix this issue will be greatly appreciated. ================CODE========================== #include<fstream> #include<iostream> #include"ParseString.h" #include"Vectors.h" using namespace std; int main(void) { //Define variables FILE *file; char *line = new char; parsestring oneline; int n_Vols = 0, n_Elms = 0, n_nods = -1, E = 0; Nod *nodes = new Nod(); Nod dummy; Elm *elements = new Elm(); int mycounter = 0; //Open file fopen_s(&file, "sample.stl", "r"); while (fgets(line, 1024, file) != NULL) //**********Getting Error Here************* { // populate required data } fclose(file); printf("%d,%d,%d", n_Vols, n_Elms, n_nods); getchar(); return 0; } ===================When broken, execution resumes at this function (not my function, something internal) void __cdecl _unlock ( int locknum ) { /* * leave the critical section. */ LeaveCriticalSection( _locktable[locknum].lock ); }

    Read the article

  • How to load/save C++ class instance (using STL containers) to disk

    - by supert
    I have a C++ class representing a hierarchically organised data tree which is very large (~Gb, basically as large as I can get away with in memory). It uses an STL list to store information at each node plus iterators to other nodes. Each node has only one parent, but 0-10 children. Abstracted, it looks something like: struct node { public: node_list_iterator parent; // iterator to a single parent node double node_data_array[X]; map<int,node_list_iterator> children; // iterators to child nodes }; class strategy { private: list<node> tree; // hierarchically linked list of nodes struct some_other_data; public: void build(); // build the tree void save(); // save the tree from disk void load(); // load the tree from disk void use(); // use the tree }; I would like to implement the load() and save() to disk, and it should be fairly fast, however the obvious problems are: I don't know the size in advance; The data contains iterators, which are volatile; My ignorance of C++ is prodigious. Could anyone suggest a pure C++ solution please?

    Read the article

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