Search Results

Search found 2886 results on 116 pages for 'std'.

Page 24/116 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

  • C++: Code assistance in Netbeans on Linux

    - by Martijn Courteaux
    Hi, My IDE (NetBeans) thinks this is wrong code, but it compiles correct: std::cout << "i = " << i << std::endl; std::cout << add(5, 7) << std::endl; std::string test = "Boe"; std::cout << test << std::endl; He always says: unable to resolve identifier .... (.... = cout, endl, string); So I think it has something to do with the code assistance. I think I have to change/add/remove some folders. Currently, I have this include folders: C compiler: /usr/local/include /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/include /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/include-fixed /usr/include C++ compiler: /usr/include/c++/4.4.3 /usr/include/c++/4.4.3/i486-linux-gnu /usr/include/c++/4.4.3/backward /usr/local/include /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/include /usr/include Thanks

    Read the article

  • optimize output value using a class and public member

    - by wiso
    Suppose you have a function, and you call it a lot of times, every time the function return a big object. I've optimized the problem using a functor that return void, and store the returning value in a public member: #include <vector> const int N = 100; std::vector<double> fun(const std::vector<double> & v, const int n) { std::vector<double> output = v; output[n] *= output[n]; return output; } class F { public: F() : output(N) {}; std::vector<double> output; void operator()(const std::vector<double> & v, const int n) { output = v; output[n] *= n; } }; int main() { std::vector<double> start(N,10.); std::vector<double> end(N); double a; // first solution for (unsigned long int i = 0; i != 10000000; ++i) a = fun(start, 2)[3]; // second solution F f; for (unsigned long int i = 0; i != 10000000; ++i) { f(start, 2); a = f.output[3]; } } Yes, I can use inline or optimize in an other way this problem, but here I want to stress on this problem: with the functor I declare and construct the output variable output only one time, using the function I do that every time it is called. The second solution is two time faster than the first with g++ -O1 or g++ -O2. What do you think about it, is it an ugly optimization?

    Read the article

  • clang does not compile but g++ does

    - by user1095108
    Can someone help me with this code: #include <type_traits> #include <vector> struct nonsense { }; template <struct nonsense const* ptr, typename R> typename std::enable_if<!std::is_void<R>::value, int>::type fo(void* const) { return 0; } template <struct nonsense const* ptr, typename R> typename std::enable_if<std::is_void<R>::value, int>::type fo(void* const) { return 1; } typedef int (*func_type)(void*); template <std::size_t O> void run_me() { static struct nonsense data; typedef std::pair<char const* const, func_type> pair_type; std::vector<pair_type> v; v.push_back(pair_type{ "a", fo<&data, int> }); v.push_back(pair_type{ "b", fo<&data, void> }); } int main(int, char*[]) { run_me<2>(); return 0; } clang-3.3 does not compile this code, but g++-4.8.1 does, which of the two compiler is right? Is something wrong with the code, as I suspect? The error reads: a.cpp:32:15: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'pair_type' (aka 'pair<const char *const, func_type>') v.push_back(pair_type{ "a", fo<&data, int> }); ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ a.cpp:33:15: error: no matching constructor for initialization of 'pair_type' (aka 'pair<const char *const, func_type>') v.push_back(pair_type{ "b", fo<&data, void> }); ^ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Read the article

  • How am i overriding this C++ inherited member function without the virtual keyword being used?

    - by Gary Willoughby
    I have a small program to demonstrate simple inheritance. I am defining a Dog class which is derived from Mammal. Both classes share a simple member function called ToString(). How is Dog overriding the implementation in the Mammal class, when i'm not using the virtual keyword? (Do i even need to use the virtual keyword to override member functions?) mammal.h #ifndef MAMMAL_H_INCLUDED #define MAMMAL_H_INCLUDED #include <string> class Mammal { public: std::string ToString(); }; #endif // MAMMAL_H_INCLUDED mammal.cpp #include <string> #include "mammal.h" std::string Mammal::ToString() { return "I am a Mammal!"; } dog.h #ifndef DOG_H_INCLUDED #define DOG_H_INCLUDED #include <string> #include "mammal.h" class Dog : public Mammal { public: std::string ToString(); }; #endif // DOG_H_INCLUDED dog.cpp #include <string> #include "dog.h" std::string Dog::ToString() { return "I am a Dog!"; } main.cpp #include <iostream> #include "dog.h" using namespace std; int main() { Dog d; std::cout << d.ToString() << std::endl; return 0; } output I am a Dog! I'm using MingW on Windows via Code::Blocks.

    Read the article

  • C++: IDE Code assistance (Linux)

    - by Martijn Courteaux
    Hi, My IDE (NetBeans) thinks this is wrong code, but it compiles correct: std::cout << "i = " << i << std::endl; std::cout << add(5, 7) << std::endl; std::string test = "Boe"; std::cout << test << std::endl; He always says: unable to resolve identifier .... (.... = cout, endl, string); So I think it has something to do with the code assistance. I think I have to change/add/remove some folders. Currently, I have this include folders: C compiler: /usr/local/include /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/include /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/include-fixed /usr/include C++ compiler: /usr/include/c++/4.4.3 /usr/include/c++/4.4.3/i486-linux-gnu /usr/include/c++/4.4.3/backward /usr/local/include /usr/lib/gcc/i486-linux-gnu/4.4.3/include /usr/include Thanks

    Read the article

  • Friends, templates, overloading <<

    - by Crystal
    I'm trying to use friend functions to overload << and templates to get familiar with templates. I do not know what these compile errors are: Point.cpp:11: error: shadows template parm 'class T' Point.cpp:12: error: declaration of 'const Point<T>& T' for this file #include "Point.h" template <class T> Point<T>::Point() : xCoordinate(0), yCoordinate(0) {} template <class T> Point<T>::Point(T xCoordinate, T yCoordinate) : xCoordinate(xCoordinate), yCoordinate(yCoordinate) {} template <class T> std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &out, const Point<T> &T) { std::cout << "(" << T.xCoordinate << ", " << T.yCoordinate << ")"; return out; } My header looks like: #ifndef POINT_H #define POINT_H #include <iostream> template <class T> class Point { public: Point(); Point(T xCoordinate, T yCoordinate); friend std::ostream &operator<<(std::ostream &out, const Point<T> &T); private: T xCoordinate; T yCoordinate; }; #endif My header also gives the warning: Point.h:12: warning: friend declaration 'std::ostream& operator<<(std::ostream&, const Point<T>&)' declares a non-template function Which I was also unsure why. Any thoughts? Thanks.

    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++ universal data type

    - by Gokul
    I have a universal data type, which is passed by value, but does not maintain the type information. We store only pointers and basic data types(like int, float etc) inside this. Now for the first time, we need to store std::string inside this. So we decided to convert it into std::string* and store it. Then comes the problem of destruction. We don't like to copy the std::string every time. So i am thinking of an approach like this. Say the data type looks like this class Atom { public : enum flags { IS_STRING, IS_EMPTY, HAS_GOT_COPIED, MARKER }; private: void* m_value; std::bitset<MARKER> m_flags; public: ..... Atom( Atom& atm ) { atm.m_flags.set( HAS_GOT_COPIED ); ..... } ..... ~Atom() { if( m_flags.test(IS_STRING) && !m_flags.test(HAS_GOT_COPIED) ) { std::string* val = static_cast<std::string*>(m_value); delete val; } } }; Is this a good approach to find out whether there is no more reference to std::string*? Any comments.. Thanks, Gokul.

    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

  • STLifying C++ classes

    - by shambulator
    I'm trying to write a class which contains several std::vectors as data members, and provides a subset of vector's interface to access them: class Mesh { public: private: std::vector<Vector3> positions; std::vector<Vector3> normals; // Several other members along the same lines }; The main thing you can do with a mesh is add positions, normals and other stuff to it. In order to allow an STL-like way of accessing a Mesh (add from arrays, other containers, etc.), I'm toying with the idea of adding methods like this: public: template<class InIter> void AddNormals(InIter first, InIter last); Problem is, from what I understand of templates, these methods will have to be defined in the header file (seems to make sense; without a concrete iterator type, the compiler doesn't know how to generate object code for the obvious implementation of this method). Is this actually a problem? My gut reaction is not to go around sticking huge chunks of code in header files, but my C++ is a little rusty with not much STL experience outside toy examples, and I'm not sure what "acceptable" C++ coding practice is on this. Is there a better way to expose this functionality while retaining an STL-like generic programming flavour? One way would be something like this: (end list) class RestrictedVector<T> { public: RestrictedVector(std::vector<T> wrapped) : wrapped(wrapped) {} template <class InIter> void Add(InIter first, InIter last) { std::copy(first, last, std::back_insert_iterator(wrapped)); } private: std::vector<T> wrapped; }; and then expose instances of these on Mesh instead, but that's starting to reek a little of overengineering :P Any advice is greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Static variable definition order in c++

    - by rafeeq
    Hi i have a class tools which has static variable std::vector m_tools. Can i insert the values into the static variable from Global scope of other classes defined in other files. Example: tools.h File class Tools { public: static std::vector<std::vector> m_tools; void print() { for(int i=0 i< m_tools.size() ; i++) std::cout<<"Tools initialized :"<< m_tools[i]; } } tools.cpp File std::vector<std::vector> Tools::m_tools; //Definition Using register class constructor for inserting the new string into static variable. class Register { public: Register(std::string str) { Tools::m_tools.pushback(str); } }; Different class which inserts the string to static variable in static variable first_tool.cpp //Global scope declare global register variable Register a("first_tool"); //////// second_tool.cpp //Global scope declare global register variable Register a("second_tool"); Main.cpp void main() { Tools abc; abc.print(); } Will this work? In the above example on only one string is getting inserted in to the static list. Problem look like "in Global scope it tries to insert the element before the definition is done" Please let me know is there any way to set the static definiton priority? Or is there any alternative way of doing the same.

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to know if std::chrono::monotonic_clock is defined?

    - by Vicente Botet Escriba
    C++0X N3092 states that monotonic_clock is optional. 20.10.5.2 Class monotonic_clock [time.clock.monotonic] 1 Objects of class monotonic_clock represent clocks for which values of time_point never decrease as physical time advances. monotonic_clock may be a synonym for system_clock if system_clock::is_monotonic is true. ** 2 The class monotonic_clock is conditionally supported.** Is there a way using SFINAE or another technique to define a traits class that states if monotonic_clock is defined? struct is_monotonic_clock_defined; If yes, how? If not, shouldn't the standard define macro that gives this information at preprocessing time?

    Read the article

  • Contents changed(cleared?) when access the pointer returned by std::string::c_str()

    - by justamask
    string conf()     {         vector v;         //..         v = func(); //this function returns a vector         return v[1];     }     void test()     {         const char* p = conf().c_str();         // the string object will be alive as a auto var         // so the pointer should be valid till the end of this function,right?           // ... lots of steps, but none of them would access the pointer p         // when access p here, SOMETIMES the contents would change ... Why?         // the platform is solaris 64 bit         // compiler is sun workshop 12         // my code is compiled as  ELF 32-bit MSB relocatable SPARC32PLUS Version 1, V8+ Required         // but need to link with some shared lib which are ELF 32-bit MSB dynamic lib SPARC Version 1, dynamically linked, stripped     }

    Read the article

  • Does std::vector change its address? How to avoid

    - by kunigami
    Since vector elements are stored contiguously, I guess it may not have the same address after some push_back's , because the initial allocated space could not suffice. I'm working on a code where I need a reference to an element in a vector, like: int main(){ vector<int> v; v.push_back(1); int *ptr = &v[0]; for(int i=2; i<100; i++) v.push_back(i); cout << *ptr << endl; //? return 0; } But it's not necessarily true that ptr contains a reference to v[0], right? How would be a good way to guarantee it? My first idea would be to use a vector of pointers and dynamic allocation. I'm wondering if there's an easier way to do that? PS.: Actually I'm using a vector of a class instead of int, but I think the issues are the same.

    Read the article

  • C++ visibility of privately inherited typedefs to nested classes

    - by beldaz
    First time on StackOverflow, so please be tolerant. In the following example (apologies for the length) I have tried to isolate some unexpected behaviour I've encountered when using nested classes within a class that privately inherits from another. I've often seen statements to the effect that there is nothing special about a nested class compared to an unnested class, but in this example one can see that a nested class (at least according to GCC 4.4) can see the public typedefs of a class that is privately inherited by the closing class. I appreciate that typdefs are not the same as member data, but I found this behaviour surprising, and I imagine many others would, too. So my question is threefold: Is this standard behaviour? (a decent explanation of why would be very helpful) Can one expect it to work on most modern compilers (i.e., how portable is it)? #include <iostream> class Base { typedef int priv_t; priv_t priv; public: typedef int pub_t; pub_t pub; Base() : priv(0), pub(1) {} }; class PubDerived : public Base { public: // Not allowed since Base::priv is private // void foo() {std::cout << priv << "\n";} class Nested { // Not allowed since Nested has no access to PubDerived member data // void foo() {std::cout << pub << "\n";} // Not allowed since typedef Base::priv_t is private // void bar() {priv_t x=0; std::cout << x << "\n";} }; }; class PrivDerived : private Base { public: // Allowed since Base::pub is public void foo() {std::cout << pub << "\n";} class Nested { public: // Works (gcc 4.4 - see below) void fred() {pub_t x=0; std::cout << x << "\n";} }; }; int main() { // Not allowed since typedef Base::priv_t private // std::cout << PubDerived::priv_t(0) << "\n"; // Allowed since typedef Base::pub_t is inaccessible std::cout << PubDerived::pub_t(0) << "\n"; // Prints 0 // Not allowed since typedef Base::pub_t is inaccessible //std::cout << PrivDerived::pub_t(0) << "\n"; // Works (gcc 4.4) PrivDerived::Nested o; o.fred(); // Prints 0 return 0; }

    Read the article

  • How to use c++0x thread in Android NDK?

    - by m-ric
    I am trying to compile this simple program with android-ndk-r8b: jni/hello_jni.cpp #include <iostream> #include <thread> void hello() { std::cout << "Hi i'm a thread!!!" << std::endl; } int main() { std::thread th(hello); th.join(); return 0; } jni/Application.mk APP_OPTIM := release APP_MODULES := hello_thread APP_STL := gnustl_static jni/Android.mk LOCAL_PATH := $(call my-dir) include $(CLEAR_VARS) LOCAL_CPPFLAGS += -std=c++0x -frtti LOCAL_MODULE := hello_thread LOCAL_LDLIBS := -L$(SYSROOT)/usr/lib -pthread LOCAL_SRC_FILES := hello_thread.cpp include $(BUILD_EXECUTABLE) ndk-build returns me an error arguin that 'thread' is not a member of 'std'. I issued ndk-build -n to get the compilation command and issued it alone in my shell: /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/toolchains/arm-linux-androideabi-4.6/prebuilt/linux-x86/bin/arm-linux-androideabi-g++ -MMD -MP -MF /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/obj/local/armeabi/objs/hello_thread/hello_thread.o.d -fpic -ffunction-sections -funwind-tables -fstack-protector -D__ARM_ARCH_5__ -D__ARM_ARCH_5T__ -D__ARM_ARCH_5E__ -D__ARM_ARCH_5TE__ -march=armv5te -mtune=xscale -msoft-float -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -mthumb -Os -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -finline-limit=64 -I/home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include -I/home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/libs/armeabi/include -I/home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/jni -DANDROID -Wa,--noexecstack -std=c++0x -frtti -O2 -DNDEBUG -g -I/home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/platforms/android-14/arch-arm/usr/include -c /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/jni/hello_thread.cpp -o /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/obj/local/armeabi/objs/hello_thread/hello_thread.o Compile++ thumb : hello_thread <= hello_thread.cpp In file included from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/platforms/android-14/arch-arm/usr/include/stdio.h:55:0, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/platforms/android-14/arch-arm/usr/include/wchar.h:33, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include/cwchar:46, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include/bits/postypes.h:42, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include/iosfwd:42, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include/ios:39, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include/ostream:40, from /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/sources/cxx-stl/gnu-libstdc++/4.6/include/iostream:40, from jni/hello_thread.cpp:4: /home/evigier/android-ndk-r8b/platforms/android-14/arch-arm/usr/include/sys/types.h:124:9: error: 'uint64_t' does not name a type /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/jni/hello_thread.cpp: In function 'int main()': /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/jni/hello_thread.cpp:14:5: error: 'thread' is not a member of 'std' /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/jni/hello_thread.cpp:14:17: error: expected ';' before 'th' /home/evigier/eclipse_workspace/hello_thread/jni/hello_thread.cpp:15:5: error: 'th' was not declared in this scope I read a lot of threads/questions about POSIX threads and C++ threads, but still cannot find my answer. My arm-linux-androideabi/include/c++/4.6/thread file defines class thread in std only: #if defined(_GLIBCXX_HAS_GTHREADS) && defined(_GLIBCXX_USE_C99_STDINT_TR1) They don't seem to be defined in my sdk (c++config.h). But how can I possibly turn them on safely? Do i need to compile my own toolchain to use (non-p)threads? My host computer is : Linux evigier-ThinkPad-X220 3.0.0-17-generic #30-Ubuntu SMP Thu Mar 8 20:45:39 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

    Read the article

  • Containers of reference_wrappers (comparison operators required?)

    - by kloffy
    If you use stl containers together with reference_wrappers of POD types, the following code works just fine: int i = 3; std::vector< boost::reference_wrapper<int> > is; is.push_back(boost::ref(i)); std::cout << (std::find(is.begin(),is.end(),i)!=is.end()) << std::endl; However, if you use non-POD types such as (contrived example): struct Integer { int value; bool operator==(const Integer& rhs) const { return value==rhs.value; } bool operator!=(const Integer& rhs) const { return !(*this == rhs); } }; It doesn't suffice to declare those comparison operators, instead you have to declare: bool operator==(const boost::reference_wrapper<Integer>& lhs, const Integer& rhs) { return boost::unwrap_ref(lhs)==rhs; } And possibly also: bool operator==(const Integer& lhs, const boost::reference_wrapper<Integer>& rhs) { return lhs==boost::unwrap_ref(rhs); } In order to get the equivalent code to work: Integer j = { 0 }; std::vector< boost::reference_wrapper<Integer> > js; js.push_back(boost::ref(j)); std::cout << (std::find(js.begin(),js.end(),j)!=js.end()) << std::endl; Now, I'm wondering if this is really the way it's meant to be done, since it seems impractical. It just seems there should be a simpler solution, e.g. templates: template<class T> bool operator==(const boost::reference_wrapper<T>& lhs, const T& rhs) { return boost::unwrap_ref(lhs)==rhs; } template<class T> bool operator==(const T& lhs, const boost::reference_wrapper<T>& rhs) { return lhs==boost::unwrap_ref(rhs); } There's probably a good reason why reference_wrapper behaves the way it does (possibly to accomodate non-POD types without comparison operators?). Maybe there already is an elegant solution and I just haven't found it.

    Read the article

  • Is there any reasonable use of a function returning an anonymous struct?

    - by Akanksh
    Here is an (artificial) example of using a function that returns an anonymous struct and does "something" useful: #include <iostream> template<typename T> T* func( T* t, float a, float b ) { if(!t) { t = new T; t->a = a; t->b = b; } else { t->a += a; t->b += b; } return t; } struct { float a, b; }* foo(float a, float b) { if(a==0) return 0; return func(foo(a-1,b), a, b); } int main() { std::cout << foo(5,6)->a << std::endl; std::cout << foo(5,6)->b << std::endl; void* v = (void*)(foo(5,6)); float* f = (float*)(v); //[1] delete f now because I know struct is floats only. std::cout << f[0] << std::endl; std::cout << f[1] << std::endl; delete[] f; return 0; } There are a few points I would like to discuss: As is apparent, this code leaks, is there anyway I can NOT leak without knowing what the underlying struct definition is? see Comment [1]. I have to return a pointer to an anonymous struct so I can create an instance of the object within the templatized function func, can I do something similar without returning a pointer? I guess the most important, is there ANY (real-world) use for this at all? As the example given above leaks and is admittedly contrived. By the way, what the function foo(a,b) does is, to return a struct containing two numbers, the sum of all numbers from 1 to a and the product of a and b. EDIT: Maybe the line new T could use a boost::shared_ptr somehow to avoid leaks, but I haven't tried that. Would that work?

    Read the article

  • Odd behavior when recursively building a return type for variadic functions

    - by Dennis Zickefoose
    This is probably going to be a really simple explanation, but I'm going to give as much backstory as possible in case I'm wrong. Advanced apologies for being so verbose. I'm using gcc4.5, and I realize the c++0x support is still somewhat experimental, but I'm going to act on the assumption that there's a non-bug related reason for the behavior I'm seeing. I'm experimenting with variadic function templates. The end goal was to build a cons-list out of std::pair. It wasn't meant to be a custom type, just a string of pair objects. The function that constructs the list would have to be in some way recursive, with the ultimate return value being dependent on the result of the recursive calls. As an added twist, successive parameters are added together before being inserted into the list. So if I pass [1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6] the end result should be {1+2, {3+4, 5+6}}. My initial attempt was fairly naive. A function, Build, with two overloads. One took two identical parameters and simply returned their sum. The other took two parameters and a parameter pack. The return value was a pair consisting of the sum of the two set parameters, and the recursive call. In retrospect, this was obviously a flawed strategy, because the function isn't declared when I try to figure out its return type, so it has no choice but to resolve to the non-recursive version. That I understand. Where I got confused was the second iteration. I decided to make those functions static members of a template class. The function calls themselves are not parameterized, but instead the entire class is. My assumption was that when the recursive function attempts to generate its return type, it would instantiate a whole new version of the structure with its own static function, and everything would work itself out. The result was: "error: no matching function for call to BuildStruct<double, double, char, char>::Go(const char&, const char&)" The offending code: static auto Go(const Type& t0, const Type& t1, const Types&... rest) -> std::pair<Type, decltype(BuildStruct<Types...>::Go(rest...))> My confusion comes from the fact that the parameters to BuildStruct should always be the same types as the arguments sent to BuildStruct::Go, but in the error code Go is missing the initial two double parameters. What am I missing here? If my initial assumption about how the static functions would be chosen was incorrect, why is it trying to call the wrong function rather than just not finding a function at all? It seems to just be mixing types willy-nilly, and I just can't come up with an explanation as to why. If I add additional parameters to the initial call, it always burrows down to that last step before failing, so presumably the recursion itself is at least partially working. This is in direct contrast to the initial attempt, which always failed to find a function call right away. Ultimately, I've gotten past the problem, with a fairly elegant solution that hardly resembles either of the first two attempts. So I know how to do what I want to do. I'm looking for an explanation for the failure I saw. Full code to follow since I'm sure my verbal description was insufficient. First some boilerplate, if you feel compelled to execute the code and see it for yourself. Then the initial attempt, which failed reasonably, then the second attempt, which did not. #include <iostream> using std::cout; using std::endl; #include <utility> template<typename T1, typename T2> std::ostream& operator <<(std::ostream& str, const std::pair<T1, T2>& p) { return str << "[" << p.first << ", " << p.second << "]"; } //Insert code here int main() { Execute(5, 6, 4.3, 2.2, 'c', 'd'); Execute(5, 6, 4.3, 2.2); Execute(5, 6); return 0; } Non-struct solution: template<typename Type> Type BuildFunction(const Type& t0, const Type& t1) { return t0 + t1; } template<typename Type, typename... Rest> auto BuildFunction(const Type& t0, const Type& t1, const Rest&... rest) -> std::pair<Type, decltype(BuildFunction(rest...))> { return std::pair<Type, decltype(BuildFunction(rest...))> (t0 + t1, BuildFunction(rest...)); } template<typename... Types> void Execute(const Types&... t) { cout << BuildFunction(t...) << endl; } Resulting errors: test.cpp: In function 'void Execute(const Types& ...) [with Types = {int, int, double, double, char, char}]': test.cpp:33:35: instantiated from here test.cpp:28:3: error: no matching function for call to 'BuildFunction(const int&, const int&, const double&, const double&, const char&, const char&)' Struct solution: template<typename... Types> struct BuildStruct; template<typename Type> struct BuildStruct<Type, Type> { static Type Go(const Type& t0, const Type& t1) { return t0 + t1; } }; template<typename Type, typename... Types> struct BuildStruct<Type, Type, Types...> { static auto Go(const Type& t0, const Type& t1, const Types&... rest) -> std::pair<Type, decltype(BuildStruct<Types...>::Go(rest...))> { return std::pair<Type, decltype(BuildStruct<Types...>::Go(rest...))> (t0 + t1, BuildStruct<Types...>::Go(rest...)); } }; template<typename... Types> void Execute(const Types&... t) { cout << BuildStruct<Types...>::Go(t...) << endl; } Resulting errors: test.cpp: In instantiation of 'BuildStruct<int, int, double, double, char, char>': test.cpp:33:3: instantiated from 'void Execute(const Types& ...) [with Types = {int, int, double, double, char, char}]' test.cpp:38:41: instantiated from here test.cpp:24:15: error: no matching function for call to 'BuildStruct<double, double, char, char>::Go(const char&, const char&)' test.cpp:24:15: note: candidate is: static std::pair<Type, decltype (BuildStruct<Types ...>::Go(BuildStruct<Type, Type, Types ...>::Go::rest ...))> BuildStruct<Type, Type, Types ...>::Go(const Type&, const Type&, const Types& ...) [with Type = double, Types = {char, char}, decltype (BuildStruct<Types ...>::Go(BuildStruct<Type, Type, Types ...>::Go::rest ...)) = char] test.cpp: In function 'void Execute(const Types& ...) [with Types = {int, int, double, double, char, char}]': test.cpp:38:41: instantiated from here test.cpp:33:3: error: 'Go' is not a member of 'BuildStruct<int, int, double, double, char, char>'

    Read the article

  • What am I not getting about this abstract class implementation?

    - by Schnapple
    PREFACE: I'm relatively inexperienced in C++ so this very well could be a Day 1 n00b question. I'm working on something whose long term goal is to be portable across multiple operating systems. I have the following files: Utilities.h #include <string> class Utilities { public: Utilities() { }; virtual ~Utilities() { }; virtual std::string ParseString(std::string const& RawString) = 0; }; UtilitiesWin.h (for the Windows class/implementation) #include <string> #include "Utilities.h" class UtilitiesWin : public Utilities { public: UtilitiesWin() { }; virtual ~UtilitiesWin() { }; virtual std::string ParseString(std::string const& RawString); }; UtilitiesWin.cpp #include <string> #include "UtilitiesWin.h" std::string UtilitiesWin::ParseString(std::string const& RawString) { // Magic happens here! // I'll put in a line of code to make it seem valid return ""; } So then elsewhere in my code I have this #include <string> #include "Utilities.h" void SomeProgram::SomeMethod() { Utilities *u = new Utilities(); StringData = u->ParseString(StringData); // StringData defined elsewhere } The compiler (Visual Studio 2008) is dying on the instance declaration c:\somepath\somecode.cpp(3) : error C2259: 'Utilities' : cannot instantiate abstract class due to following members: 'std::string Utilities::ParseString(const std::string &)' : is abstract c:\somepath\utilities.h(9) : see declaration of 'Utilities::ParseString' So in this case what I'm wanting to do is use the abstract class (Utilities) like an interface and have it know to go to the implemented version (UtilitiesWin). Obviously I'm doing something wrong but I'm not sure what. It occurs to me as I'm writing this that there's probably a crucial connection between the UtilitiesWin implementation of the Utilities abstract class that I've missed, but I'm not sure where. I mean, the following works #include <string> #include "UtilitiesWin.h" void SomeProgram::SomeMethod() { Utilities *u = new UtilitiesWin(); StringData = u->ParseString(StringData); // StringData defined elsewhere } but it means I'd have to conditionally go through the different versions later (i.e., UtilitiesMac(), UtilitiesLinux(), etc.) What have I missed here?

    Read the article

  • Iterator not accessible because of private inheritance

    - by Bo Tian
    I've created a new class that composes std::deque by private inheritance, i.e, class B : private std::deque<A> { ... }; and in my source code I tried to use iterator of B, i.e., B::iterator it The compiler error is error C2247: 'std::deque<_Ty>::iterator' not accessible because 'B' uses 'private' to inherit from 'std::deque<_Ty>' So the question is, how can I make the iterator accessible?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >