Search Results

Search found 5153 results on 207 pages for 'unique ptr'.

Page 24/207 | < Previous Page | 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31  | Next Page >

  • getaddrinfo appears to return different results between Windows and Ubuntu?

    - by MrDuk
    I have the following two sets of code: Windows #undef UNICODE #include <winsock2.h> #include <ws2tcpip.h> #include <stdio.h> // link with Ws2_32.lib #pragma comment (lib, "Ws2_32.lib") int __cdecl main(int argc, char **argv) { //----------------------------------------- // Declare and initialize variables WSADATA wsaData; int iResult; INT iRetval; DWORD dwRetval; argv[1] = "www.google.com"; argv[2] = "80"; int i = 1; struct addrinfo *result = NULL; struct addrinfo *ptr = NULL; struct addrinfo hints; struct sockaddr_in *sockaddr_ipv4; // struct sockaddr_in6 *sockaddr_ipv6; LPSOCKADDR sockaddr_ip; char ipstringbuffer[46]; DWORD ipbufferlength = 46; /* // Validate the parameters if (argc != 3) { printf("usage: %s <hostname> <servicename>\n", argv[0]); printf("getaddrinfo provides protocol-independent translation\n"); printf(" from an ANSI host name to an IP address\n"); printf("%s example usage\n", argv[0]); printf(" %s www.contoso.com 0\n", argv[0]); return 1; } */ // Initialize Winsock iResult = WSAStartup(MAKEWORD(2, 2), &wsaData); if (iResult != 0) { printf("WSAStartup failed: %d\n", iResult); return 1; } //-------------------------------- // Setup the hints address info structure // which is passed to the getaddrinfo() function ZeroMemory( &hints, sizeof(hints) ); hints.ai_family = AF_UNSPEC; hints.ai_socktype = SOCK_STREAM; // hints.ai_protocol = IPPROTO_TCP; printf("Calling getaddrinfo with following parameters:\n"); printf("\tnodename = %s\n", argv[1]); printf("\tservname (or port) = %s\n\n", argv[2]); //-------------------------------- // Call getaddrinfo(). If the call succeeds, // the result variable will hold a linked list // of addrinfo structures containing response // information dwRetval = getaddrinfo(argv[1], argv[2], &hints, &result); if ( dwRetval != 0 ) { printf("getaddrinfo failed with error: %d\n", dwRetval); WSACleanup(); return 1; } printf("getaddrinfo returned success\n"); // Retrieve each address and print out the hex bytes for(ptr=result; ptr != NULL ;ptr=ptr->ai_next) { printf("getaddrinfo response %d\n", i++); printf("\tFlags: 0x%x\n", ptr->ai_flags); printf("\tFamily: "); switch (ptr->ai_family) { case AF_UNSPEC: printf("Unspecified\n"); break; case AF_INET: printf("AF_INET (IPv4)\n"); sockaddr_ipv4 = (struct sockaddr_in *) ptr->ai_addr; printf("\tIPv4 address %s\n", inet_ntoa(sockaddr_ipv4->sin_addr) ); break; case AF_INET6: printf("AF_INET6 (IPv6)\n"); // the InetNtop function is available on Windows Vista and later // sockaddr_ipv6 = (struct sockaddr_in6 *) ptr->ai_addr; // printf("\tIPv6 address %s\n", // InetNtop(AF_INET6, &sockaddr_ipv6->sin6_addr, ipstringbuffer, 46) ); // We use WSAAddressToString since it is supported on Windows XP and later sockaddr_ip = (LPSOCKADDR) ptr->ai_addr; // The buffer length is changed by each call to WSAAddresstoString // So we need to set it for each iteration through the loop for safety ipbufferlength = 46; iRetval = WSAAddressToString(sockaddr_ip, (DWORD) ptr->ai_addrlen, NULL, ipstringbuffer, &ipbufferlength ); if (iRetval) printf("WSAAddressToString failed with %u\n", WSAGetLastError() ); else printf("\tIPv6 address %s\n", ipstringbuffer); break; case AF_NETBIOS: printf("AF_NETBIOS (NetBIOS)\n"); break; default: printf("Other %ld\n", ptr->ai_family); break; } printf("\tSocket type: "); switch (ptr->ai_socktype) { case 0: printf("Unspecified\n"); break; case SOCK_STREAM: printf("SOCK_STREAM (stream)\n"); break; case SOCK_DGRAM: printf("SOCK_DGRAM (datagram) \n"); break; case SOCK_RAW: printf("SOCK_RAW (raw) \n"); break; case SOCK_RDM: printf("SOCK_RDM (reliable message datagram)\n"); break; case SOCK_SEQPACKET: printf("SOCK_SEQPACKET (pseudo-stream packet)\n"); break; default: printf("Other %ld\n", ptr->ai_socktype); break; } printf("\tProtocol: "); switch (ptr->ai_protocol) { case 0: printf("Unspecified\n"); break; case IPPROTO_TCP: printf("IPPROTO_TCP (TCP)\n"); break; case IPPROTO_UDP: printf("IPPROTO_UDP (UDP) \n"); break; default: printf("Other %ld\n", ptr->ai_protocol); break; } printf("\tLength of this sockaddr: %d\n", ptr->ai_addrlen); printf("\tCanonical name: %s\n", ptr->ai_canonname); } freeaddrinfo(result); WSACleanup(); return 0; } Ubuntu /* ** listener.c -- a datagram sockets "server" demo */ #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <unistd.h> #include <errno.h> #include <string.h> #include <sys/types.h> #include <sys/socket.h> #include <netinet/in.h> #include <arpa/inet.h> #include <netdb.h> #define MYPORT "4950" // the port users will be connecting to #define MAXBUFLEN 100 // get sockaddr, IPv4 or IPv6: void *get_in_addr(struct sockaddr *sa) { if (sa->sa_family == AF_INET) { return &(((struct sockaddr_in*)sa)->sin_addr); } return &(((struct sockaddr_in6*)sa)->sin6_addr); } int main(void) { int sockfd; struct addrinfo hints, *servinfo, *p; int rv; int numbytes; struct sockaddr_storage their_addr; char buf[MAXBUFLEN]; socklen_t addr_len; char s[INET6_ADDRSTRLEN]; memset(&hints, 0, sizeof hints); hints.ai_family = AF_UNSPEC; // set to AF_INET to force IPv4 hints.ai_socktype = SOCK_DGRAM; hints.ai_flags = AI_PASSIVE; // use my IP if ((rv = getaddrinfo(NULL, MYPORT, &hints, &servinfo)) != 0) { fprintf(stderr, "getaddrinfo: %s\n", gai_strerror(rv)); return 1; } // loop through all the results and bind to the first we can for(p = servinfo; p != NULL; p = p->ai_next) { if ((sockfd = socket(p->ai_family, p->ai_socktype, p->ai_protocol)) == -1) { perror("listener: socket"); continue; } if (bind(sockfd, p->ai_addr, p->ai_addrlen) == -1) { close(sockfd); perror("listener: bind"); continue; } break; } if (p == NULL) { fprintf(stderr, "listener: failed to bind socket\n"); return 2; } freeaddrinfo(servinfo); printf("listener: waiting to recvfrom...\n"); addr_len = sizeof their_addr; if ((numbytes = recvfrom(sockfd, buf, MAXBUFLEN-1 , 0, (struct sockaddr *)&their_addr, &addr_len)) == -1) { perror("recvfrom"); exit(1); } printf("listener: got packet from %s\n", inet_ntop(their_addr.ss_family, get_in_addr((struct sockaddr *)&their_addr), s, sizeof s)); printf("listener: packet is %d bytes long\n", numbytes); buf[numbytes] = '\0'; printf("listener: packet contains \"%s\"\n", buf); close(sockfd); return 0; } When I attempt www.google.com, I don't get the ipv6 socket returned on Windows - why is this? Outputs: (ubuntu) caleb@ub1:~/Documents/dev/cs438/mp0/MP0$ ./a.out www.google.com IP addresses for www.google.com: IPv4: 74.125.228.115 IPv4: 74.125.228.116 IPv4: 74.125.228.112 IPv4: 74.125.228.113 IPv4: 74.125.228.114 IPv6: 2607:f8b0:4004:803::1010 Outputs: (win) Calling getaddrinfo with following parameters: nodename = www.google.com servname (or port) = 80 getaddrinfo returned success getaddrinfo response 1 Flags: 0x0 Family: AF_INET (IPv4) IPv4 address 74.125.228.114 Socket type: SOCK_STREAM (stream) Protocol: Unspecified Length of this sockaddr: 16 Canonical name: (null) getaddrinfo response 2 Flags: 0x0 Family: AF_INET (IPv4) IPv4 address 74.125.228.115 Socket type: SOCK_STREAM (stream) Protocol: Unspecified Length of this sockaddr: 16 Canonical name: (null) getaddrinfo response 3 Flags: 0x0 Family: AF_INET (IPv4) IPv4 address 74.125.228.116 Socket type: SOCK_STREAM (stream) Protocol: Unspecified Length of this sockaddr: 16 Canonical name: (null) getaddrinfo response 4 Flags: 0x0 Family: AF_INET (IPv4) IPv4 address 74.125.228.112 Socket type: SOCK_STREAM (stream) Protocol: Unspecified Length of this sockaddr: 16 Canonical name: (null) getaddrinfo response 5 Flags: 0x0 Family: AF_INET (IPv4) IPv4 address 74.125.228.113 Socket type: SOCK_STREAM (stream) Protocol: Unspecified Length of this sockaddr: 16 Canonical name: (null)

    Read the article

  • Is there an easy way to make `boost::ptr_vector` more debugger friendly in Visual Studio?

    - by Billy ONeal
    I'm considering using boost::ptr_container as a result of the responses from this question. My biggest problem with the library is that I cannot view the contents of the collection in the debugger, because the MSVC debugger doesn't recognize it, and therefore I cannot see the contents of the containers. (All the data gets stored as void * internally) I've heard MSVC has a feature called "debugger visualizers" which would allow the user to make the debugger smarter about these kinds of things, but I've never written anything like this, and I'm not hugely firmiliar with such things. For example, compare the behavior of boost::shared_ptr with MSVC's own std::tr1::shared_ptr. In the debugger (i.e. in the Watch window), the boost version shows up as a big mess of internal variables used for implementing the shared pointer, but the MSVC version shows up as a plain pointer to the object (and the shared_ptr's innards are hidden). How can I get started either using or implementing such a thing?

    Read the article

  • Returning references while using shared_ptrs

    - by Goose Bumper
    Suppose I have a rather large class Matrix, and I've overloaded operator== to check for equality like so: bool operator==(Matrix &a, Matrix &b); Of course I'm passing the Matrix objects by reference because they are so large. Now i have a method Matrix::inverse() that returns a new Matrix object. Now I want to use the inverse directly in a comparison, like so: if (a.inverse()==b) { ... }` The problem is, this means the inverse method needs to return a reference to a Matrix object. Two questions: Since I'm just using that reference in this once comparison, is this a memory leak? What happens if the object-to-be-returned in the inverse() method belongs to a boost::shared_ptr? As soon as the method exits, the shared_ptr is destroyed and the object is no longer valid. Is there a way to return a reference to an object that belongs to a shared_ptr?

    Read the article

  • Normal pointer vs Auto pointer (std::auto_ptr)

    - by AKN
    Code snippet (normal pointer) int *pi = new int; int i = 90; pi = &i; int k = *pi + 10; cout<<k<<endl; delete pi; [Output: 100] Code snippet (auto pointer) Case 1: std::auto_ptr<int> pi(new int); int i = 90; pi = &i; int k = *pi + 10; //Throws unhandled exception error at this point while debugging. cout<<k<<endl; //delete pi; (It deletes by itself when goes out of scope. So explicit 'delete' call not required) Case 2: std::auto_ptr<int> pi(new int); int i = 90; *pi = 90; int k = *pi + 10; cout<<k<<endl; [Output: 100] Can someone please tell why it failed to work for case 1?

    Read the article

  • What's the performance penalty of weak_ptr?

    - by Kornel Kisielewicz
    I'm currently designing a object structure for a game, and the most natural organization in my case became a tree. Being a great fan of smart pointers I use shared_ptr's exclusively. However, in this case, the children in the tree will need access to it's parent (example -- beings on map need to be able to access map data -- ergo the data of their parents. The direction of owning is of course that a map owns it's beings, so holds shared pointers to them. To access the map data from within a being we however need a pointer to the parent -- the smart pointer way is to use a reference, ergo a weak_ptr. However, I once read that locking a weak_ptr is a expensive operation -- maybe that's not true anymore -- but considering that the weak_ptr will be locked very often, I'm concerned that this design is doomed with poor performance. Hence the question: What is the performance penalty of locking a weak_ptr? How significant is it?

    Read the article

  • How to accomplish covariant return types when returning a shared_ptr?

    - by Kyle
    using namespace boost; class A {}; class B : public A {}; class X { virtual shared_ptr<A> foo(); }; class Y : public X { virtual shared_ptr<B> foo(); }; The return types aren't covariant (nor are they, therefore, legal), but they would be if I was using raw pointers instead. What's the commonly accepted idiom to work around this, if there is one?

    Read the article

  • Where is shared_ptr?

    - by Jake
    I am so frustrated right now after several hours trying to find where shared_ptr is located. None of the examples I see show complete code to include the headers for shared_ptr (and working). Simply stating "std" "tr1" and "" is not helping at all! I have downloaded boosts and all but still it doesn't show up! Can someone help me by telling exactly where to find it? Thanks for letting me vent my frustrations!

    Read the article

  • How to declare a 2D array of 2D array pointers and access them?

    - by vikramtheone
    Hi Guys, How can I declare an 2D array of 2D Pointers? And later access the individual array elements of the 2D arrays. Is my approach correct? void alloc_2D(int ***memory, unsigned int rows, unsigned int cols); int main() { int i, j; int **ptr; int **array[10][10]; for(i=0;i<10;i++) { for(j=0;j<10;j++) { alloc_2D(&ptr, 10, 10); array[i][j] = ptr; } } //After I do this, how can I access the 10 individual 2D arrays? return 0; } void alloc_2D(int ***memory, unsigned int rows, unsigned int cols) { int **ptr; *memory = NULL; ptr = malloc(rows * sizeof(int*)); if(ptr == NULL) { printf("\nERROR: Memory allocation failed!"); } else { int i; for(i = 0; i< rows; i++) { ptr[i] = malloc(cols * sizeof(float)); if(ptr[i]==NULL) { printf("\nERROR: Memory allocation failed!"); } } } *memory = ptr; }

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to increase the efficiency of shared_ptr by storing the reference count inside the co

    - by BillyONeal
    Hello everyone :) This is becoming a common pattern in my code, for when I need to manage an object that needs to be noncopyable because either A. it is "heavy" or B. it is an operating system resource, such as a critical section: class Resource; class Implementation : public boost::noncopyable { friend class Resource; HANDLE someData; Implementation(HANDLE input) : someData(input) {}; void SomeMethodThatActsOnHandle() { //Do stuff }; public: ~Implementation() { FreeHandle(someData) }; }; class Resource { boost::shared_ptr<Implementation> impl; public: Resource(int argA) explicit { HANDLE handle = SomeLegacyCApiThatMakesSomething(argA); if (handle == INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE) throw SomeTypeOfException(); impl.reset(new Implementation(handle)); }; void SomeMethodThatActsOnTheResource() { impl->SomeMethodThatActsOnTheHandle(); }; }; This way, shared_ptr takes care of the reference counting headaches, allowing Resource to be copyable, even though the underlying handle should only be closed once all references to it are destroyed. However, it seems like we could save the overhead of allocating shared_ptr's reference counts and such separately if we could move that data inside Implementation somehow, like boost's intrusive containers do. If this is making the premature optimization hackles nag some people, I actually agree that I don't need this for my current project. But I'm curious if it is possible.

    Read the article

  • boost::shared_ptr<const T> to boost::shared_ptr<T>

    - by Flevine
    I want to cast the const-ness out of a boost::shared_ptr, but I boost::const_pointer_cast is not the answer. boost::const_pointer_cast wants a const boost::shared_ptr, not a boost::shared_ptr. Let's forego the obligitory 'you shouldn't be doing that'. I know... but I need to do it... so what's the best/easiest way to do it? For clarity sake: boost::shared_ptr<const T> orig_ptr( new T() ); boost::shared_ptr<T> new_ptr = magic_incantation(orig_ptr); I need to know the magic_incantation() Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Can't inherit from auto_str without problems

    - by fret
    What I want to do is this: #include <memory> class autostr : public std::auto_ptr<char> { public: autostr(char *a) : std::auto_ptr<char>(a) {} autostr(autostr &a) : std::auto_ptr<char>(a) {} // define a bunch of string utils here... }; autostr test(char a) { return autostr(new char(a)); } void main(int args, char **arg) { autostr asd = test('b'); return 0; } (I actually have a copy of the auto_ptr class that handles arrays as well, but the same error applies to the stl one) The compile error using GCC 4.3.0 is: main.cpp:152: error: no matching function for call to `autostr::autostr(autostr)' main.cpp:147: note: candidates are: autostr::autostr(autostr&) main.cpp:146: note: autostr::autostr(char*) I don't understand why it's not matching the autostr argument as a valid parameter to autostr(autostr&).

    Read the article

  • Can't inherit from auto_ptr without problems

    - by fret
    What I want to do is this: #include <memory> class autostr : public std::auto_ptr<char> { public: autostr(char *a) : std::auto_ptr<char>(a) {} autostr(autostr &a) : std::auto_ptr<char>(a) {} // define a bunch of string utils here... }; autostr test(char a) { return autostr(new char(a)); } void main(int args, char **arg) { autostr asd = test('b'); return 0; } (I actually have a copy of the auto_ptr class that handles arrays as well, but the same error applies to the stl one) The compile error using GCC 4.3.0 is: main.cpp:152: error: no matching function for call to `autostr::autostr(autostr)' main.cpp:147: note: candidates are: autostr::autostr(autostr&) main.cpp:146: note: autostr::autostr(char*) I don't understand why it's not matching the autostr argument as a valid parameter to autostr(autostr&).

    Read the article

  • Is this a correct implementation of singleton C++?

    - by Kamal
    class A{ static boost::shared_ptr<A> getInstance(){ if(pA==NULL){ pA = new A(); } return boost::shared_ptr(pA); } //destructor ~A(){ delete pA; pA=NULL; } private: A(){ //some initialization code } //private assigment and copy constructors A(A const& copy); // Not Implemented A& operator=(A const& copy); // Not Implemented static A* pA; }; A* A::pA = NULL;

    Read the article

  • How to attach boost::shared_ptr (or another smart pointer) to reference counter of object's parent?

    - by Checkers
    I remember encountering this concept before, but can't find it in Google now. If I have an object of type A, which directly embeds an object of type B: class A { B b; }; How can I have a smart pointer to B, e. g. boost::shared_ptr<B>, but use reference count of A? Assume an instance of A itself is heap-allocated I can safely get its shared count using, say, enable_shared_from_this.

    Read the article

  • How to handle 'this' pointer in constructor?

    - by Kyle
    I have objects which create other child objects within their constructors, passing 'this' so the child can save a pointer back to its parent. I use boost::shared_ptr extensively in my programming as a safer alternative to std::auto_ptr or raw pointers. So the child would have code such as shared_ptr<Parent>, and boost provides the shared_from_this() method which the parent can give to the child. My problem is that shared_from_this() cannot be used in a constructor, which isn't really a crime because 'this' should not be used in a constructor anyways unless you know what you're doing and don't mind the limitations. Google's C++ Style Guide states that constructors should merely set member variables to their initial values. Any complex initialization should go in an explicit Init() method. This solves the 'this-in-constructor' problem as well as a few others as well. What bothers me is that people using your code now must remember to call Init() every time they construct one of your objects. The only way I can think of to enforce this is by having an assertion that Init() has already been called at the top of every member function, but this is tedious to write and cumbersome to execute. Are there any idioms out there that solve this problem at any step along the way?

    Read the article

  • Is boost shared_ptr <XXX> thread safe?

    - by sxingfeng
    I have a question about boost :: shared_ptr. There are lots of thread. class CResource { xxxxxx } class CResourceBase { public: void SetResource(shared_ptr<CResource> res) { m_Res = res; } shared_ptr<CResource> GetResource() { return m_Res; } private: shared_ptr<CResource> m_Res; } CResourceBase base; //---------------------------------------------- Thread A: while (true) { ...... shared_ptr<CResource> nowResource = base.GetResource(); nowResource.doSomeThing(); ... } Thread B: shared_ptr<CResource> nowResource; base.SetResource(nowResource); ... //----------------------------------------------------------- If thread A do not care the nowResource is the newest . Will this part of code have problem? I mean when ThreadB do not SetResource completely, Thread A get a wrong smart point by GetResource? Another question : what does thread-safe mean? If I do not care about whether the resource is newest, will the shared_ptr nowResource crash the program when the nowResource is released or will the problem destroy the shared_point?

    Read the article

  • How to declare array of 2D array pointers and access them?

    - by vikramtheone
    Hi Guys, How can I declare an 2D array of 2D Pointers? And later access the individual array elements of the 2D arrays. Is my approach correct? main() { int i, j; int **array[10][10]; int **ptr = NULL; for(i=0;i<10;i++) { for(j=0j<10;j++) { alloc_2D(&ptr, 10, 10); array[i][j] = ptr; } } //After I do this, how can I access the individual 2D array //and then the individual elements of the 2D arrays? } void alloc_2D(float ***memory, unsigned int rows, unsigned int cols) { float **ptr; *memory = NULL; ptr = malloc(rows * sizeof(float*)); if(ptr == NULL) { status = ERROR; printf("\nERROR: Memory allocation failed!"); } else { int i; for(i = 0; i< rows; i++) { ptr[i] = malloc(cols * sizeof(float)); if(ptr[i]==NULL) { status = ERROR; printf("\nERROR: Memory allocation failed!"); } } } *memory = ptr; }

    Read the article

  • Trouble assigning a tr1::shared_ptr

    - by Max
    I've got a class that has a tr1::shared_ptr as a member, like so: class Foo { std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp> bsp; void Bar(); } In member function Bar, I try to assign it like this: bsp = newTCODBsp(x,y,w,h); g++ then gives me this error no match for ‘operator=’ in ‘((yarl::mapGen::MapGenerator*)this)->yarl::mapGen::MapGenerator::bsp = (operator new(40u), (<statement>, ((TCODBsp*)<anonymous>)))’ /usr/include/c++/4.4/tr1/shared_ptr.h:834: note: candidates are: std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp>& std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp>::operator=(const std::tr1::shared_ptr<TCODBsp>&) in my code, Foo is actually yarl::mapGen::MapGenerator. What am I doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • Casting a container of shared_ptr

    - by Jamie Cook
    Hi all, I have a method void foo(list<shared_ptr<Base>>& myList); Which I'm trying to call with a two different types of lists, one of DerivedClass1 and one of DerivedClass2 list<shared_ptr<DerivedClass1>> myList1; foo(myList1); list<shared_ptr<DerivedClass2>> myList2; foo(myList2); However this obviously generates a compiler error error: a reference of type "std::list<boost::shared_ptr<Base>, std::allocator<boost::shared_ptr<Base>>> &" (not const-qualified) cannot be initialized with a value of type "std::list<boost::shared_ptr<DerivedClass1>, std::allocator<boost::shared_ptr<DerivedClass1>>>" Is there any easy way to cast a container of shared_ptr? Of alternate containers that can accomplish this?

    Read the article

  • `enable_shared_from_this` has a non-virtual destructor

    - by Shtééf
    I have a pet project with which I experiment with new features of the upcoming C++0x standard. While I have experience with C, I'm fairly new to C++. To train myself into best practices, (besides reading a lot), I have enabled some strict compiler parameters (using GCC 4.4.1): -std=c++0x -Werror -Wall -Winline -Weffc++ -pedantic-errors This has worked fine for me. Until now, I have been able to resolve all obstacles. However, I have a need for enable_shared_from_this, and this is causing me problems. I get the following warning (error, in my case) when compiling my code (probably triggered by -Weffc++): base class ‘class std::enable_shared_from_this<Package>’ has a non-virtual destructor So basically, I'm a bit bugged by this implementation of enable_shared_from_this, because: A destructor of a class that is intended for subclassing should always be virtual, IMHO. The destructor is empty, why have it at all? I can't imagine anyone would want to delete their instance by reference to enable_shared_from_this. But I'm looking for ways to deal with this, so my question is really, is there a proper way to deal with this? And: am I correct in thinking that this destructor is bogus, or is there a real purpose to it?

    Read the article

  • C++ destructor problem with boost::scoped_ptr

    - by bb-generation
    I have a question about the following code: #include <iostream> #include <boost/scoped_ptr.hpp> class Interface { }; class A : public Interface { public: A() { std::cout << "A()" << std::endl; } virtual ~A() { std::cout << "~A()" << std::endl; } }; Interface* get_a() { A* a = new A; return a; } int main() { { std::cout << "1" << std::endl; boost::scoped_ptr<Interface> x(get_a()); std::cout << "2" << std::endl; } std::cout << "3" << std::endl; } It creates the following output: 1 A() 2 3 As you can see, it doesn't call the destructor of A. The only way I see to get the destructor of A being called, is to add a destructor for the Interface class like this: virtual ~Interface() { } But I really want to avoid any Implementation in my Interface class and virtual ~Interface() = 0; doesn't work (produces some linker errors complaining about a non existing implementation of ~Interface(). So my question is: What do I have to change in order to make the destructor being called, but (if possible) leave the Interface as an Interface (only abstract methods).

    Read the article

  • Multiset of shared_ptrs as a dynamic priority queue: Concept and practice

    - by Sarah
    I was using a vector-based priority queue typedef std::priority_queue< Event, vector< Event >, std::greater< Event > > EventPQ; to manage my Event objects. Now my simulation has to be able to find and delete certain Event objects not at the top of the queue. I'd like to know if my planned work-around can do what I need it to, and if I have the syntax right. I'd also like to know if dramatically better solutions exist. My plan is to make EventPQ a multiset of smart pointers to Event objects: typedef std::multi_set< boost::shared_ptr< Event > > EventPQ; I'm borrowing functions of the Event class from a related post on a multimap priority queue. // Event.h #include <cstdlib> using namespace std; #include <set> #include <boost/shared_ptr.hpp> class Event; typedef std::multi_set< boost::shared_ptr< Event > > EventPQ; class Event { public: Event( double t, int eid, int hid ); ~Event(); void add( EventPQ& q ); void remove(); bool operator < ( const Event & rhs ) const { return ( time < rhs.time ); } bool operator > ( const Event & rhs ) const { return ( time > rhs.time ); } double time; int eventID; int hostID; EventPQ* mq; EventPQ::iterator mIt; }; // Event.cpp Event::Event( double t, int eid, int hid ) { time = t; eventID = eid; hostID = hid; } Event::~Event() {} void Event::add( EventPQ& q ) { mq = &q; mIt = q.insert( boost::shared_ptr<Event>(this) ); } void Event::remove() { mq.erase( mIt ); mq = 0; mIt = EventPQ::iterator(); } I was hoping that by making EventPQ a container of pointers, I could avoid wasting time copying Events into the container and avoid accidentally editing the wrong copy. Would it be dramatically easier to store the Events themselves in EventPQ instead? Does it make more sense to remove the time keys from Event objects and use them instead as keys in a multimap? Assuming the current implementation seems okay, my questions are: Do I need to specify how to sort on the pointers, rather than the objects, or does the multiset automatically know to sort on the objects pointed to? If I have a shared_ptr ptr1 to an Event that also has a pointer in the EventPQ container, how do I find and delete the corresponding pointer in EventPQ? Is it enough to .find( ptr1 ), or do I instead have to find by the key (time)? Is the Event::remove() sufficient for removing the pointer in the EventPQ container? There's a small chance multiple events could be created with the same time (obviously implied in the use of multiset). If the find() works on event times, to avoid accidentally deleting the wrong event, I was planning to throw in a further check on eventID and hostID. Does this seem reasonable? (Dumb syntax question) In Event.h, is the declaration of dummy class Event;, then the EventPQ typedef, and then the real class Event declaration appropriate? I'm obviously an inexperienced programmer with very spotty background--this isn't for homework. Would love suggestions and explanations. Please let me know if any part of this is confusing. Thanks.

    Read the article

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