Search Results

Search found 320 results on 13 pages for 'polymorphism'.

Page 6/13 | < Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >

  • Operator issues with cout

    - by BSchlinker
    I have a simple package class which is overloaded so I can output package data simply with cout << packagename. I also have two data types, name which is a string and shipping cost with a double. protected: string name; string address; double weight; double shippingcost; ostream &operator<<( ostream &output, const Package &package ) { output << "Package Information ---------------"; output << "Recipient: " << package.name << endl; output << "Shipping Cost (including any applicable fees): " << package.shippingcost; The problem is occurring with the 4th line (output << "Recipient:...). I'm receiving the error "no operator "<<" matches these operands". However, line 5 is fine. I'm guessing this has to do with the data type being a string for the package name. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Validation not bubbling up to my other models.

    - by DJTripleThreat
    Ok, I have a relationship between People, Users and Employees such that All Employees are Users and all Users are People. Person is an abstract class that User is derived from and Employee is derived from that. Now... I have an EmployeesController class and the create method looks like this: def create @employee = Employee.new(params[:employee]) @employee.user = User.new(params[:user]) @employee.user.person = Person.new(params[:person]) respond_to do |format| if @employee.save flash[:notice] = 'Employee was successfully created.' format.html { redirect_to(@employee) } format.xml { render :xml => @employee, :status => :created, :location => @employee } else format.html { render :action => "new" } format.xml { render :xml => @employee.errors, :status => :unprocessable_entity } end end end As you can see, when I'm using the :polymorphic => true clause, the way you access the super class is by doing something like @derived_class_variable.super_class_variable.super_super_etc. The Person class has a validates_presence_of :first_name and when it is satisfied, on my form, everything is OK. However, if I leave out the first name, it won't prevent the employee from being saved. What happens is that the employee record is saved but the person record isn't (because of the validation). How can I get the validation errors to show up in the flash object?

    Read the article

  • VIrtual class problem

    - by ugur
    What i think about virtual class is, if a derived class has a public base, let's say, class base, then a pointer to derived can be assigned to a variable of type pointer to base without use of any explicit type conversion. But what if, we are inside of base class then how can we call derived class's functions. I will give an example: class Graph{ public: Graph(string); virtual bool addEdge(string,string); } class Direct:public Graph{ public: Direct(string); bool addEdge(string,string); } Direct::Direct(string filename):Graph(filename){}; When i call constructor of Direct class then it calls Graph. Now lets think Graph function calls addedge. Graph(string str){ addedge(str,str); } When it calls addedge, even if the function is virtual, it calls Graph::edge. What i want is, to call Direct::addedge. How can it be done?

    Read the article

  • Virtual class problem

    - by ugur
    What i think about virtual class is, if a derived class has a public base, let's say, class base, then a pointer to derived can be assigned to a variable of type pointer to base without use of any explicit type conversion. But what if, we are inside of base class then how can we call derived class's functions. I will give an example: class Graph{ public: Graph(string); virtual bool addEdge(string,string); } class Direct:public Graph{ public: Direct(string); bool addEdge(string,string); } Direct::Direct(string filename):Graph(filename){}; When i call constructor of Direct class then it calls Graph. Now lets think Graph function calls addedge. Graph(string str){ addedge(str,str); } When it calls addedge, even if the function is virtual, it calls Graph::edge. What i want is, to call Direct::addedge. How can it be done?

    Read the article

  • Python - wxPython What's wrong?

    - by Wallter
    I am trying to write a simple custom button in wx.Python. My code is as follows,(As a side note: I am relatively new to python having come from C++ and C# any help on syntax and function of the code would be great! - knowing that, it could be a simple error. thanks!) Error Traceback (most recent call last): File "D:\Documents\Python2\Button\src\Custom_Button.py", line 10, in <module> class Custom_Button(wx.PyControl): File "D:\Documents\Python2\Button\src\Custom_Button.py", line 13, in Custom_Button Mouse_over_bmp = wx.Bitmap(0) # When the mouse is over File "C:\Python26\lib\site-packages\wx-2.8-msw-unicode\wx\_gdi.py", line 561, in __init__ _gdi_.Bitmap_swiginit(self,_gdi_.new_Bitmap(*args, **kwargs)) TypeError: String or Unicode type required Main.py class MyFrame(wx.Frame): def __init__(self, parent, ID, title): wxFrame.__init__(self, parent, ID, title, wxDefaultPosition, wxSize(400, 400)) self.CreateStatusBar() self.SetStatusText("Program testing custom button overlays") menu = wxMenu() menu.Append(ID_ABOUT, "&About", "More information about this program") menu.AppendSeparator() menu.Append(ID_EXIT, "E&xit", "Terminate the program") menuBar = wxMenuBar() menuBar.Append(menu, "&File"); self.SetMenuBar(menuBar) self.Button1 = Custom_Button(self, parent, -1, "D:/Documents/Python/Normal.bmp", "D:/Documents/Python/Clicked.bmp", "D:/Documents/Python/Over.bmp", "None", wx.Point(200,200), wx.Size(300,100)) EVT_MENU(self, ID_ABOUT, self.OnAbout) EVT_MENU(self, ID_EXIT, self.TimeToQuit) def OnAbout(self, event): dlg = wxMessageDialog(self, "Testing the functions of custom " "buttons using pyDev and wxPython", "About", wxOK | wxICON_INFORMATION) dlg.ShowModal() dlg.Destroy() def TimeToQuit(self, event): self.Close(true) class MyApp(wx.App): def OnInit(self): frame = MyFrame(NULL, -1, "wxPython | Buttons") frame.Show(true) self.SetTopWindow(frame) return true app = MyApp(0) app.MainLoop() Custom Button import wx from wxPython.wx import * class Custom_Button(wx.PyControl): ############################################ ##THE ERROR IS BEING THROWN SOME WHERE IN HERE ## ############################################ # The BMP's Mouse_over_bmp = wx.Bitmap(0) # When the mouse is over Norm_bmp = wx.Bitmap(0) # The normal BMP Push_bmp = wx.Bitmap(0) # The down BMP Pos_bmp = wx.Point(0,0) # The posisition of the button def __init__(self, parent, NORM_BMP, PUSH_BMP, MOUSE_OVER_BMP, pos, size, text="", id=-1, **kwargs): wx.PyControl.__init__(self,parent, id, **kwargs) # Set the BMP's to the ones given in the constructor self.Mouse_over_bmp = wx.Bitmap(MOUSE_OVER_BMP) self.Norm_bmp = wx.Bitmap(NORM_BMP) self.Push_bmp = wx.Bitmap(PUSH_BMP) self.Pos_bmp = pos ############################################ ##THE ERROR IS BEING THROWN SOME WHERE IN HERE ## ############################################ self.Bind(wx.EVT_LEFT_DOWN, self._onMouseDown) self.Bind(wx.EVT_LEFT_UP, self._onMouseUp) self.Bind(wx.EVT_LEAVE_WINDOW, self._onMouseLeave) self.Bind(wx.EVT_ENTER_WINDOW, self._onMouseEnter) self.Bind(wx.EVT_ERASE_BACKGROUND,self._onEraseBackground) self.Bind(wx.EVT_PAINT,self._onPaint) self._mouseIn = self._mouseDown = False def _onMouseEnter(self, event): self._mouseIn = True def _onMouseLeave(self, event): self._mouseIn = False def _onMouseDown(self, event): self._mouseDown = True def _onMouseUp(self, event): self._mouseDown = False self.sendButtonEvent() def sendButtonEvent(self): event = wx.CommandEvent(wx.wxEVT_COMMAND_BUTTON_CLICKED, self.GetId()) event.SetInt(0) event.SetEventObject(self) self.GetEventHandler().ProcessEvent(event) def _onEraseBackground(self,event): # reduce flicker pass def _onPaint(self, event): dc = wx.BufferedPaintDC(self) dc.SetFont(self.GetFont()) dc.SetBackground(wx.Brush(self.GetBackgroundColour())) dc.Clear() dc.DrawBitmap(self.Norm_bmp) # draw whatever you want to draw # draw glossy bitmaps e.g. dc.DrawBitmap if self._mouseIn: # If the Mouse is over the button dc.DrawBitmap(self, self.Mouse_over_bmp, self.Pos_bmp, useMask=False) if self._mouseDown: # If the Mouse clicks the button dc.DrawBitmap(self, self.Push_bmp, self.Pos_bmp, useMask=False)

    Read the article

  • Me As Child Type

    - by Steven
    I have a MustInherit Parent class with two Child classes which Inherit from the Parent. How can I use (or Cast) Me in a Parent function as the the child type of that instance? EDIT: My actual goal is to be able to serialize (BinaryFormatter.Serialize(Stream, Object)) either of my child classes. However, "repeating the code" in each child "seems" wrong.

    Read the article

  • Polymorphic Queue

    - by metdos
    Hello Everyone, I'm trying to implement a Polymorphic Queue. Here is my trial: QQueue <Request *> requests; while(...) { QString line = QString::fromUtf8(client->readLine()).trimmed(); if(...)){ Request *request=new Request(); request->tcpMessage=line.toUtf8(); request->decodeFromTcpMessage(); //this initialize variables in request using tcpMessage if(request->requestType==REQUEST_LOGIN){ LoginRequest loginRequest; request=&loginRequest; request->tcpMessage=line.toUtf8(); request->decodeFromTcpMessage(); requests.enqueue(request); } //Here pointers in "requests" do not point to objects I created above, and I noticed that their destructors are also called. LoginRequest *loginRequest2=dynamic_cast<LoginRequest *>(requests.dequeue()); loginRequest2->decodeFromTcpMessage(); } } Unfortunately, I could not manage to make work Polymorphic Queue with this code because of the reason I mentioned in second comment.I guess, I need to use smart-pointers, but how? I'm open to any improvement of my code or a new implementation of polymorphic queue. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • How can I instantiate a base class and then convert it to a derived class?

    - by Eric
    I was wondering how to do this, consider the following classes public class Fruit { public string Name { get; set; } public Color Color { get; set; } } public class Apple : Fruit { public Apple() { } } How can I instantiate a new fruit but upcast to Apple, is there a way to instantiate a bunch of Fruit and make them apples with the name & color set. Do I need to manually deep copy? Of course this fails Fruit a = new Fruit(); a.Name = "FirstApple"; a.Color = Color.Red; Apple wa = a as Apple; System.Diagnostics.Debug.Print("Apple name: " + wa.Name); Do I need to pass in a Fruit to the AppleCTor and manually set the name and color( or 1-n properties) Is there an better design to do this?

    Read the article

  • Calling a method with an instance of derived class of derived generic type

    - by madsbirk
    Okay, so I have classes class B<T> : A<T> class L : K and a method void Method(A<K> a) {...} What I would like to do is this b = new B<L>(); Method(b); //error But it is not possible to b to the correct type. Indeed it is not possible to make this cast A<K> t = new A<L>(); //error I would really like to not have to change the internals of Method. I have no problems making changes to B and/or L. Do I have any options for making some sort of workaround? I guess it should be possible for Method to execute all of its method calls etc. on b, since B derives from A and L derives from K?

    Read the article

  • C++ type-checking at compile-time

    - by Masterofpsi
    Hi, all. I'm pretty new to C++, and I'm writing a small library (mostly for my own projects) in C++. In the process of designing a type hierarchy, I've run into the problem of defining the assignment operator. I've taken the basic approach that was eventually reached in this article, which is that for every class MyClass in a hierarchy derived from a class Base you define two assignment operators like so: class MyClass: public Base { public: MyClass& operator =(MyClass const& rhs); virtual MyClass& operator =(Base const& rhs); }; // automatically gets defined, so we make it call the virtual function below MyClass& MyClass::operator =(MyClass const& rhs); { return (*this = static_cast<Base const&>(rhs)); } MyClass& MyClass::operator =(Base const& rhs); { assert(typeid(rhs) == typeid(*this)); // assigning to different types is a logical error MyClass const& casted_rhs = dynamic_cast<MyClass const&>(rhs); try { // allocate new variables Base::operator =(rhs); } catch(...) { // delete the allocated variables throw; } // assign to member variables } The part I'm concerned with is the assertion for type equality. Since I'm writing a library, where assertions will presumably be compiled out of the final result, this has led me to go with a scheme that looks more like this: class MyClass: public Base { public: operator =(MyClass const& rhs); // etc virtual inline MyClass& operator =(Base const& rhs) { assert(typeid(rhs) == typeid(*this)); return this->set(static_cast<Base const&>(rhs)); } private: MyClass& set(Base const& rhs); // same basic thing }; But I've been wondering if I could check the types at compile-time. I looked into Boost.TypeTraits, and I came close by doing BOOST_MPL_ASSERT((boost::is_same<BOOST_TYPEOF(*this), BOOST_TYPEOF(rhs)>));, but since rhs is declared as a reference to the parent class and not the derived class, it choked. Now that I think about it, my reasoning seems silly -- I was hoping that since the function was inline, it would be able to check the actual parameters themselves, but of course the preprocessor always gets run before the compiler. But I was wondering if anyone knew of any other way I could enforce this kind of check at compile-time.

    Read the article

  • Emulating Dynamic Dispatch in C++ based on Template Parameters

    - by Jon Purdy
    This is heavily simplified for the sake of the question. Say I have a hierarchy: struct Base { virtual int precision() const = 0; }; template<int Precision> struct Derived : public Base { typedef Traits<Precision>::Type Type; Derived(Type data) : value(data) {} virtual int precision() const { return Precision; } Type value; }; I want a function like: Base* function(const Base& a, const Base& b); Where the specific type of the result of the function is the same type as whichever of first and second has the greater Precision; something like the following pseudocode: template<class T> T* operation(const T& a, const T& b) { return new T(a.value + b.value); } Base* function(const Base& a, const Base& b) { if (a.precision() > b.precision()) return operation((A&)a, A(b.value)); else if (a.precision() < b.precision()) return operation(B(a.value), (B&)b); else return operation((A&)a, (A&)b); } Where A and B are the specific types of a and b, respectively. I want f to operate independently of how many instantiations of Derived there are. I'd like to avoid a massive table of typeid() comparisons, though RTTI is fine in answers. Any ideas?

    Read the article

  • Polymorphic functions with parameters from a class hierarchy

    - by myahya
    Let's say I have the following class hierarchy in C++: class Base; class Derived1 : public Base; class Derived2 : public Base; class ParamType; class DerivedParamType1 : public ParamType; class DerivedParamType2 : public ParamType; And I want a polymorphic function, func(ParamType), defined in Base to take a parameter of type DerivedParamType1 for Derived1 and a parameter of type DerivedParamType2 for Derived2. How would this be done without pointers, if possible?

    Read the article

  • How to pass multiple different records (not class due to delphi limitations) to a function?

    - by mingo
    Hi to all. I have a number of records I cannot convert to classes due to Delphi limitation (all of them uses class operators to implement comparisons). But I have to pass to store them in a class not knowing which record type I'm using. Something like this: type R1 = record begin x :Mytype; class operator Equal(a,b:R1) end; type R2 = record begin y :Mytype; class operator Equal(a,b:R2) end; type Rn = record begin z :Mytype; class operator Equal(a,b:Rn) end; type TC = class begin x : TObject; y : Mytype; function payload (n:TObject) end; function TC.payload(n:TObject) begin x := n; end; program: c : TC; x : R1; y : R2; ... c := TC.Create(): n:=TOBject(x); c.payload(n); Now, Delphi do not accept typecast from record to TObject, and I cannot make them classes due to Delphi limitation. Anyone knows a way to pass different records to a function and recognize their type when needed, as we do with class: if x is TMyClass then TMyClass(x) ... ???

    Read the article

  • SQL, MVC, Entity Framework

    - by Anthony
    Hi Im using the above technologies and have ran into what I presume is a design issue I have made. I have an Artwork table in my DB and have been able to add art (I now think of these as Digital Products) to a shopping cart + CartLine table fine. The system I have that adds art to galleries and user accounts etc works fine. Now the client wants to sell T-shirts, Mugs and Pens etc, 'HardwareProducts' so I have created a 'HardwareProducts' table. Now I have two different product types in two tables. I use GUID's as the PK's in both the HardwareProducts table and Artwork table. When a customer adds an item to their cart I store the GUID in the ProductID column in the CartItems table. The issue is the database will not know which table to reference when I bring the LineItem object up through my ORM to the front end. In OOP I can see how you would have a base class of Product, and then a DigitalProduct class and HardwareProduct class drived from it, but how do you model this in SQL Server and the Entity Framework please, or is there another way?

    Read the article

  • Operator== in derived class never gets called.

    - by Robin Welch
    Can someone please put me out of my misery with this? I'm trying to figure out why a derived operator== never gets called in a loop. To simplify the example, here's my Base and Derived class: class Base { // ... snipped bool operator==( const Base& other ) const { return name_ == other.name_; } }; class Derived : public Base { // ... snipped bool operator==( const Derived& other ) const { return ( static_cast<const Base&>( *this ) == static_cast<const Base&>( other ) ? age_ == other.age_ : false ); }; Now when I instantiate and compare like this ... Derived p1("Sarah", 42); Derived p2("Sarah", 42); bool z = ( p1 == p2 ); ... all is fine. Here the operator== from Derived gets called, but when I loop over a list, comparing items in a list of pointers to Base objects ... list<Base*> coll; coll.push_back( new Base("fred") ); coll.push_back( new Derived("sarah", 42) ); // ... snipped // Get two items from the list. Base& obj1 = **itr; Base& obj2 = **itr2; cout << obj1.asString() << " " << ( ( obj1 == obj2 ) ? "==" : "!=" ) << " " << obj2.asString() << endl; Here asString() (which is virtual and not shown here for brevity) works fine, but obj1 == obj2 always calls the Base operator== even if the two objects are Derived. I know I'm going to kick myself when I find out what's wrong, but if someone could let me down gently it would be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Is extending a base class with non-virtual destructor dangerous in C++

    - by Akusete
    Take the following code class A { }; class B : public A { }; class C : public A { int x; }; int main (int argc, char** argv) { A* b = new B(); A* c = new C(); //in both cases, only ~A() is called, not ~B() or ~C() delete b; //is this ok? delete c; //does this line leak memory? return 0; } when calling delete on a class with a non-virtual destructor with member functions (like class C), can the memory allocator tell what the proper size of the object is? If not, is memory leaked? Secondly, if the class has no member functions, and no explicit destructor behaviour (like class B), is everything ok? I ask this because I wanted to create a class to extend std::string, (which I know is not recommended, but for the sake of the discussion just bear with it), and overload the +=,+ operator. -Weffc++ gives me a warning because std::string has a non virtual destructor, but does it matter if the sub-class has no members and does not need to do anything in its destructor? -- FYI the += overload was to do proper file path formatting, so the path class could be used like class path : public std::string { //... overload, +=, + //... add last_path_component, remove_path_component, ext, etc... }; path foo = "/some/file/path"; foo = foo + "filename.txt"; //and so on... I just wanted to make sure someone doing this path* foo = new path(); std::string* bar = foo; delete bar; would not cause any problems with memory allocation

    Read the article

  • Calling Subclass Method in Java

    - by destructo_gold
    Given the following situation (UML below), If Y has the method: public void PrintWs(); and X has: ArrayList <P> myPs = new ArrayList(); Y y = new Y(); Z z = new Z(); myPs.add(y); myPs.add(z); How do I loop through each myPs object and call all Ys PrintWs (without using instanceof)? http://starbucks.mirror.waffleimages.com/files/68/68c26b815e913acd00307bf27bde534c0f1f8bfb.jpg

    Read the article

  • Is my method for avoiding dynamic_cast<> faster than dynamic_cast<> itself ?

    - by ereOn
    Hi, I was answering a question a few minutes ago and it raised to me another one: In one of my projects, I do some network message parsing. The messages are in the form of: [1 byte message type][2 bytes payload length][x bytes payload] The format and content of the payload are determined by the message type. I have a class hierarchy, based on a common class Message. To instanciate my messages, i have a static parsing method which gives back a Message* depending on the message type byte. Something like: Message* parse(const char* frame) { // This is sample code, in real life I obviously check that the buffer // is not NULL, and the size, and so on. switch(frame[0]) { case 0x01: return new FooMessage(); case 0x02: return new BarMessage(); } // Throw an exception here because the mesage type is unknown. } I sometimes need to access the methods of the subclasses. Since my network message handling must be fast, I decived to avoid dynamic_cast<> and I added a method to the base Message class that gives back the message type. Depending on this return value, I use a static_cast<> to the right child type instead. I did this mainly because I was told once that dynamic_cast<> was slow. However, I don't know exactly what it really does and how slow it is, thus, my method might be as just as slow (or slower) but far more complicated. What do you guys think of this design ? Is it common ? Is it really faster than using dynamic_cast<> ? Any detailed explanation of what happen under the hood when one use dynamic_cast<> is welcome !

    Read the article

  • Is there a way to automaticly call all versions of an inherited method?

    - by Eric
    I'm writing a plug-in for a 3D modeling program. I have a custom class that wraps instances of elements in the 3D model, and in turn derives it's properties from the element it wraps. When the element in the model changes I want my class(es) to update their properties based on the new geometry. In the simplified example below. I have classes AbsCurveBasd, Extrusion, and Shell which are all derived from one another. Each of these classes implement a RefreshFromBaseShape() method which updates specific properties based on the current baseShape the class is wrapping. I can call base.RefreshFromBaseShape() in each implementation of RefreshFromBaseShape() to ensure that all the properties are updated. But I'm wondering if there is a better way where I don't have to remember to do this in every implementation of RefershFromBaseShape()? For example because AbsCurveBased does not have a parameterless constructor the code wont even compile unless the constructors call the base class constructors. public abstract class AbsCurveBased { internal Curve baseShape; double Area{get;set;} public AbsCurveBased(Curve baseShape) { this.baseShape = baseShape; RefreshFromBaseShape(); } public virtual void RefreshFromBaseShape() { //sets the Area property from the baseShape } } public class Extrusion : AbsCurveBased { double Volume{get;set;} double Height{get;set;} public Extrusion(Curve baseShape):base(baseShape) { this.baseShape = baseShape; RefreshFromBaseShape(); } public override void RefreshFromBaseShape() { base.RefreshFromBaseShape(); //sets the Volume property based on the area and the height } } public class Shell : Extrusion { double ShellVolume{get;set;} double ShellThickness{get;set;} public Shell(Curve baseShape): base(baseShape) { this.baseShape = baseShape; RefreshFromBaseShape(); } public void RefreshFromBaseShape() { base.RefreshFromBaseShape(); //sets this Shell Volume from the Extrusion properties and ShellThickness property } }

    Read the article

  • How to have abstract and overriding constants in C# ?

    - by Chris
    Hi all, My code below won't compile. What am i doing wrong? I'm basically trying to have a public constant that is overridden in the base class. public abstract class MyBaseClass { public abstract const string bank = "???"; } public class SomeBankClass : MyBaseClass { public override const string bank = "Some Bank"; } Thanks as always for being so helpful!

    Read the article

  • Are monads Writer m and Either e categorically dual?

    - by sdcvvc
    I noticed there is a dual relation between Writer m and Either e monads. If m is a monoid, then unit :: () -> m join :: (m,m) -> m can be used to form a monad: return is composition: a -> ((),a) -> (m,a) join is composition: (m,(m,a)) -> ((m,m),a) -> (m,a) The dual of () is Void (empty type), the dual of product is coproduct. Every type e can be given "comonoid" structure: unit :: Void -> e join :: Either e e -> e in the obvious way. Now, return is composition: a -> Either Void a -> Either e a join is composition: Either e (Either e a) -> Either (Either e e) a -> Either e a and this is the Either e monad. The arrows follow exactly the same pattern. Question: Is it possible to write a single generic code that will be able to perform both as Either e and as Writer m depending on the monoid given?

    Read the article

  • Safe and polymorphic toEnum

    - by jetxee
    I'd like to write a safe version of toEnum: safeToEnum :: (Enum t, Bounded t) => Int -> Maybe t A naive implementation: safeToEnum :: (Enum t, Bounded t) => Int -> Maybe t safeToEnum i = if (i >= fromEnum (minBound :: t)) && (i <= fromEnum (maxBound :: t)) then Just . toEnum $ i else Nothing main = do print $ (safeToEnum 1 :: Maybe Bool) print $ (safeToEnum 2 :: Maybe Bool) And it doesn't work: safeToEnum.hs:3:21: Could not deduce (Bounded t1) from the context () arising from a use of `minBound' at safeToEnum.hs:3:21-28 Possible fix: add (Bounded t1) to the context of an expression type signature In the first argument of `fromEnum', namely `(minBound :: t)' In the second argument of `(>=)', namely `fromEnum (minBound :: t)' In the first argument of `(&&)', namely `(i >= fromEnum (minBound :: t))' safeToEnum.hs:3:56: Could not deduce (Bounded t1) from the context () arising from a use of `maxBound' at safeToEnum.hs:3:56-63 Possible fix: add (Bounded t1) to the context of an expression type signature In the first argument of `fromEnum', namely `(maxBound :: t)' In the second argument of `(<=)', namely `fromEnum (maxBound :: t)' In the second argument of `(&&)', namely `(i <= fromEnum (maxBound :: t))' As well as I understand the message, the compiler does not recognize that minBound and maxBound should produce exactly the same type as in the result type of safeToEnum inspite of the explicit type declaration (:: t). Any idea how to fix it?

    Read the article

  • compile time if && return string reference optimization

    - by Truncheon
    Hi. I'm writing a series classes that inherit from a base class using virtual. They are INT, FLOAT and STRING objects that I want to use in a scripting language. I'm trying to implement weak typing, but I don't want STRING objects to return copies of themselves when used in the following way (instead I would prefer to have a reference returned which can be used in copying): a = "hello "; b = "world"; c = a + b; I have written the following code as a mock example: #include <iostream> #include <string> #include <cstdio> #include <cstdlib> std::string dummy("<int object cannot return string reference>"); struct BaseImpl { virtual bool is_string() = 0; virtual int get_int() = 0; virtual std::string get_string_copy() = 0; virtual std::string const& get_string_ref() = 0; }; struct INT : BaseImpl { int value; INT(int i = 0) : value(i) { std::cout << "constructor called\n"; } INT(BaseImpl& that) : value(that.get_int()) { std::cout << "copy constructor called\n"; } bool is_string() { return false; } int get_int() { return value; } std::string get_string_copy() { char buf[33]; sprintf(buf, "%i", value); return buf; } std::string const& get_string_ref() { return dummy; } }; struct STRING : BaseImpl { std::string value; STRING(std::string s = "") : value(s) { std::cout << "constructor called\n"; } STRING(BaseImpl& that) { if (that.is_string()) value = that.get_string_ref(); else value = that.get_string_copy(); std::cout << "copy constructor called\n"; } bool is_string() { return true; } int get_int() { return atoi(value.c_str()); } std::string get_string_copy() { return value; } std::string const& get_string_ref() { return value; } }; struct Base { BaseImpl* impl; Base(BaseImpl* p = 0) : impl(p) {} ~Base() { delete impl; } }; int main() { Base b1(new INT(1)); Base b2(new STRING("Hello world")); Base b3(new INT(*b1.impl)); Base b4(new STRING(*b2.impl)); std::cout << "\n"; std::cout << b1.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << b2.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << b3.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << b4.impl->get_int() << "\n"; std::cout << "\n"; std::cout << b1.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << b2.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << b3.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << b4.impl->get_string_ref() << "\n"; std::cout << "\n"; std::cout << b1.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; std::cout << b2.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; std::cout << b3.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; std::cout << b4.impl->get_string_copy() << "\n"; return 0; } It was necessary to add an if check in the STRING class to determine whether its safe to request a reference instead of a copy: Script code: a = "test"; b = a; c = 1; d = "" + c; /* not safe to request reference by standard */ C++ code: STRING(BaseImpl& that) { if (that.is_string()) value = that.get_string_ref(); else value = that.get_string_copy(); std::cout << "copy constructor called\n"; } If was hoping there's a way of moving that if check into compile time, rather than run time.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13  | Next Page >