Search Results

Search found 15432 results on 618 pages for 'private inheritance'.

Page 8/618 | < Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >

  • Objective-C protocol vs inheritance vs extending?

    - by ryanjm.mp
    I have a couple classes that have nearly identical code. Only a string or two is different between them. What I would like to do is to make them "x" from another class that defines those functions and then uses constants or something else to define those strings that are different. I'm not sure if "x" is inheritance or extending or what. That is what I need help with. For example: objectA.m: -(void)helloWorld { NSLog("Hello %@",child.name); } objectBob.m: #define name @"Bob" objectJoe.m #define name @"Joe" (I'm not sure if it's legal to define strings, but this gets the point across) It would be ideal if objectBob.m and objectJoe.m didn't have to even define the methods, just their relationship to objectA.m. Is there any way to do something like this? It is kind of like protocol, except in reverse, I want the "protocol" to actually define the functions. If all else fails I'll just make objectA.m: -(void)helloWorld:(NSString *name) { NSLog("Hello %@",name); } And have the other files call that function (and just #import objectA.m).

    Read the article

  • Inheritance inside a template - public members become invisible?

    - by Juliano
    I'm trying to use inheritance among classes defined inside a class template (inner classes). However, the compiler (GCC) is refusing to give me access to public members in the base class. Example code: template <int D> struct Space { struct Plane { Plane(Space& b); virtual int& at(int y, int z) = 0; Space& space; /* <= this member is public */ }; struct PlaneX: public Plane { /* using Plane::space; */ PlaneX(Space& b, int x); int& at(int y, int z); const int cx; }; int& at(int x, int y, int z); }; template <int D> int& Space<D>::PlaneX::at(int y, int z) { return space.at(cx, y, z); /* <= but it fails here */ }; Space<4> sp4; The compiler says: file.cpp: In member function ‘int& Space::PlaneX::at(int, int)’: file.cpp:21: error: ‘space’ was not declared in this scope If using Plane::space; is added to the definition of class PlaneX, or if the base class member is accessed through the this pointer, or if class Space is changed to a non-template class, then the compiler is fine with it. I don't know if this is either some obscure restriction of C++, or a bug in GCC (GCC versions 4.4.1 and 4.4.3 tested). Does anyone have an idea?

    Read the article

  • Generics vs inheritance (when no collection classes are involved)

    - by Ram
    This is an extension of this questionand probably might even be a duplicate of some other question(If so, please forgive me). I see from MSDN that generics are usually used with collections The most common use for generic classes is with collections like linked lists, hash tables, stacks, queues, trees and so on where operations such as adding and removing items from the collection are performed in much the same way regardless of the type of data being stored. The examples I have seen also validate the above statement. Can someone give a valid use of generics in a real-life scenario which does not involve any collections ? Pedantically, I was thinking about making an example which does not involve collections public class Animal<T> { public void Speak() { Console.WriteLine("I am an Animal and my type is " + typeof(T).ToString()); } public void Eat() { //Eat food } } public class Dog { public void WhoAmI() { Console.WriteLine(this.GetType().ToString()); } } and "An Animal of type Dog" will be Animal<Dog> magic = new Animal<Dog>(); It is entirely possible to have Dog getting inherited from Animal (Assuming a non-generic version of Animal)Dog:Animal Therefore Dog is an Animal Another example I was thinking was a BankAccount. It can be BankAccount<Checking>,BankAccount<Savings>. This can very well be Checking:BankAccount and Savings:BankAccount. Are there any best practices to determine if we should go with generics or with inheritance ?

    Read the article

  • SQL n:m Inheritance join

    - by Nightmares
    I want to join a table which contains n:m relationship between groups. (Groups are defined in a separate table). This table only has entries listing a member_group_id and a parent_group_id. Given this structure: id(int) | member_group_id(int) | parent_group_id(int) The "base" query looks like this: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.member_group_id = p1.member_group_id The "base" query correctly shows all relationships (I checked by doing it manually.) The problem is when I try to apply a where clause to this query to filter for a specific group as "point of origin" (the first group for which I want all parent groups) it returns only the closest parents. For example like this: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.member_group_id = p1.member_group_id where p1.group_id = 1 Can anyone give a clue how I can fix this? Or a different approach to realize this. (I suppose I could always do this in my C++ source code on the server side but I would have to transfer a entire table which has a high growth potential to the application server.) UPDATE: select p1.group_id, p2.group_id, p1.member_group_id, p2.member_group_id from group_member_group as p1 join group_member_group as p2 on p2.group_id = p1.member_group_id Typing mistake confirmed. Now I don't get past first level of inheritance period. Thanks at denied for pointing that out.

    Read the article

  • Generics in return types of static methods and inheritance

    - by Axel
    Generics in return types of static methods do not seem to get along well with inheritance. Please take a look at the following code: class ClassInfo<C> { public ClassInfo(Class<C> clazz) { this(clazz,null); } public ClassInfo(Class<C> clazz, ClassInfo<? super C> superClassInfo) { } } class A { public static ClassInfo<A> getClassInfo() { return new ClassInfo<A>(A.class); } } class B extends A { // Error: The return type is incompatible with A.getClassInfo() public static ClassInfo<B> getClassInfo() { return new ClassInfo<B>(B.class, A.getClassInfo()); } } I tried to circumvent this by changing the return type for A.getClassInfo(), and now the error pops up at another location: class ClassInfo<C> { public ClassInfo(Class<C> clazz) { this(clazz,null); } public ClassInfo(Class<C> clazz, ClassInfo<? super C> superClassInfo) { } } class A { public static ClassInfo<? extends A> getClassInfo() { return new ClassInfo<A>(A.class); } } class B extends A { public static ClassInfo<? extends B> getClassInfo() { // Error: The constructor ClassInfo<B>(Class<B>, ClassInfo<capture#1-of ? extends A>) is undefined return new ClassInfo<B>(B.class, A.getClassInfo()); } } What is the reason for this strict checking on static methods? And how can I get along? Changing the method name seems awkward.

    Read the article

  • Inheritance concept java..help

    - by max
    Hi everyone. I'd be very grateful if someone could help me to understand the inheritance concept in Java. Is the following code an example of that? I mean the class WavPanel is actually a subclass of JPanel which acts as a superclass. Is that correct? If so it means that "what JPanel has, also WavPanel but it is more specific since through its methods you can do something else". Am I wrong? thank you. Max import javax.swing.JPanel; class WavPanel extends JPanel { List<Byte> audioBytes; List<Line2D.Double> lines; public WavPanel() { super(); setBackground(Color.black); resetWaveform(); } public void resetWaveform() { audioBytes = new ArrayList<Byte>(); lines = new ArrayList<Line2D.Double>(); repaint(); } }

    Read the article

  • Resolving ambiguous this pointer in C++

    - by Paul Tevis
    I'm trying to derive a new class from an old one. The base class declaration looks like this: class Driver : public Plugin, public CmdObject { protected: Driver(); public: static Driver* GetInstance(); virtual Engine& GetEngine(); public: // Plugin methods... virtual bool InitPlugin (Mgr* pMgr); virtual bool Open(); virtual bool Close(); // CmdObject virtual bool ExecObjCmd(uint16 cmdID, uint16 nbParams, CommandParam *pParams, CmdChannelError& error); Mgr *m_pMgr; protected: Services *m_pServices; Engine m_Engine; }; Its constructor looks like this: Driver::Driver() : YCmdObject("Driver", (CmdObjectType)100, true), m_Engine("MyEngine") { Services *m_pServices = NULL; Mgr *m_pMgr = NULL; } So when I created my derived class, I first tried to simply inherit from the base class: class NewDriver : public Driver and copy the constructor: NewDriver::NewDriver() : CmdObject("NewDriver", (EYCmdObjectType)100, true), m_Engine("MyNewEngine") { Services *m_pServices = NULL; Mgr *m_pMgr = NULL; } The compiler (VisualDSP++ 5.0 from Analog Devices) didn't like this: ".\NewDriver.cpp", line 10: cc0293: error: indirect nonvirtual base class is not allowed CmdObject("NewDriver", (EYCmdObjectType)100, true), That made sense, so I decided to directly inherit from Plugin and CmdObject. To avoid multiple inheritance ambiguity problems (so I thought), I used virtual inheritance: class NewDriver : public Driver, public virtual Plugin, public virtual CmdObject But then, in the implementation of a virtual method in NewDriver, I tried to call the Mgr::RegisterPlugin method that takes a Plugin*, and I got this: ".\NewDriver.cpp", line 89: cc0286: error: base class "Plugin" is ambiguous if (!m_pMgr->RegisterPlugin(this)) How is the this pointer ambiguous, and how do I resolve it? Thanks, --Paul

    Read the article

  • Django conditional template inheritance

    - by Ed
    I have template that displays object elements with hyperlinks to other parts of my site. I have another function that displays past versions of the same object. In this display, I don't want the hyperlinks. I'm under the assumption that I can't dynamically switch off the hyperlinks, so I've included both versions in the same template. I use an if statement to either display the hyperlinked version or the plain text version. I prefer to keep them in the same template because if I need to change the format of one, it will be easy to apply it to the other right there. The template extends framework.html. Framework has a breadcrumb system and it extends base.html. Base has a simple top menu system. So here's my dilemma. When viewing the standard hyperlink data, I want to see the top menu and the breadcrumbs. But when viewing the past version plain text data, I only want the data, no menu, no breadcrumbs. I'm unsure if this is possible given my current design. I tried having framework inherit the primary template so that I could choose to call either framework (and display the breadcrumbs), or the template itself, thus skipping the breadcrumbs, but I want framework.html available for other templates as well. If framework.html extends a specific template, I lose the ability to display it in other templates. I tried writing an if statement that would display a the top_menu block and the nav_menu block from base.html and framework.html respectively. This would overwrite their blocks and allow me to turn off those elements conditional on the if. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to be conditional; if the block elements are in the template at all, surrounded by an if or not, I lose the menus. I thought about using {% include %} to pick up the breadcrumbs and a split out top menu. In that case though, I'll have to include it all the time. No more inheritance. Is this the best option given my requirement?

    Read the article

  • Can simple javascript inheritance be simplified even further?

    - by Will
    John Resig (of jQuery fame) provides a concise and elegant way to allow simple JavaScript inheritance. It was so short and sweet, in fact, that it inspired me to try and simplify it even further (see code below). I've modified his original function such that it still passes all his tests and has the potential advantage of: readability (50% less code) simplicity (you don't have to be a ninja to understand it) performance (no extra wrappers around super/base method calls) consistency with C#'s base keyword Because this seems almost too good to be true, I want to make sure my logic doesn't have any fundamental flaws/holes/bugs, or if anyone has additional suggestions to improve or refute the code (perhaps even John Resig could chime in here!). Does anyone see anything wrong with my approach (below) vs. John Resig's original approach? if (!window.Class) { window.Class = function() {}; window.Class.extend = function(members) { var prototype = new this(); for (var i in members) prototype[i] = members[i]; prototype.base = this.prototype; function object() { if (object.caller == null && this.initialize) this.initialize.apply(this, arguments); } object.constructor = object; object.prototype = prototype; object.extend = arguments.callee; return object; }; } And the tests (below) are nearly identical to the original ones except for the syntax around base/super method calls (for the reason enumerated above): var Person = Class.extend( { initialize: function(isDancing) { this.dancing = isDancing; }, dance: function() { return this.dancing; } }); var Ninja = Person.extend( { initialize: function() { this.base.initialize(false); }, dance: function() { return this.base.dance(); }, swingSword: function() { return true; } }); var p = new Person(true); alert("true? " + p.dance()); // => true var n = new Ninja(); alert("false? " + n.dance()); // => false alert("true? " + n.swingSword()); // => true alert("true? " + (p instanceof Person && p instanceof Class && n instanceof Ninja && n instanceof Person && n instanceof Class));

    Read the article

  • Silverlight with MVVM Inheritance: ModelView and View matching the Model

    - by moonground.de
    Hello Stackoverflowers! :) Today I have a special question on Silverlight (4 RC) MVVM and inheritance concepts and looking for a best practice solution... I think that i understand the basic idea and concepts behind MVVM. My Model doesn't know anything about the ViewModel as the ViewModel itself doesn't know about the View. The ViewModel knows the Model and the Views know the ViewModels. Imagine the following basic (example) scenario (I'm trying to keep anything short and simple): My Model contains a ProductBase class with a few basic properties, a SimpleProduct : ProductBase adding a few more Properties and ExtendedProduct : ProductBase adding another properties. According to this Model I have several ViewModels, most essential SimpleProductViewModel : ViewModelBase and ExtendedProductViewModel : ViewModelBase. Last but not least, according Views SimpleProductView and ExtendedProductView. In future, I might add many product types (and matching Views + VMs). 1. How do i know which ViewModel to create when receiving a Model collection? After calling my data provider method, it will finally end up having a List<ProductBase>. It containts, for example, one SimpleProduct and two ExtendedProducts. How can I transform the results to an ObservableCollection<ViewModelBase> having the proper ViewModel types (one SimpleProductViewModel and two ExtendedProductViewModels) in it? I might check for Model type and construct the ViewModel accordingly, i.e. foreach(ProductBase currentProductBase in resultList) if (currentProductBase is SimpleProduct) viewModels.Add( new SimpleProductViewModel((SimpleProduct)currentProductBase)); else if (currentProductBase is ExtendedProduct) viewModels.Add( new ExtendedProductViewModels((ExtendedProduct)currentProductBase)); ... } ...but I consider this very bad practice as this code doesn't follow the object oriented design. The other way round, providing abstract Factory methods would reduce the code to: foreach(ProductBase currentProductBase in resultList) viewModels.Add(currentProductBase.CreateViewModel()) and would be perfectly extensible but since the Model doesn't know the ViewModels, that's not possible. I might bring interfaces into game here, but I haven't seen such approach proven yet. 2. How do i know which View to display when selecting a ViewModel? This is pretty the same problem, but on a higher level. Ended up finally having the desired ObservableCollection<ViewModelBase> collection would require the main view to choose a matching View for the ViewModel. In WPF, there is a DataTemplate concept which can supply a View upon a defined DataType. Unfortunately, this doesn't work in Silverlight and the only replacement I've found was the ResourceSelector of the SLExtensions toolkit which is buggy and not satisfying. Beside that, all problems from Question 1 apply as well. Do you have some hints or even a solution for the problems I describe, which you hopefully can understand from my explanation? Thank you in advance! Thomas

    Read the article

  • Hierarchy inheritance

    - by reito
    I had faced the problem. In my C++ hierarchy tree I have two branches for entities of difference nature, but same behavior - same interface. I created such hierarchy trees (first in image below). And now I want to work with Item or Base classes independetly of their nature (first or second). Then I create one abstract branch for this use. My mind build (second in image below). But it not working. Working scheme seems (third in image below). It's bad logic, I think... Do anybody have some ideas about such hierarchy inheritance? How make it more logical? More simple for understanding? Image Sorry for my english - russian internet didn't help:) Update: You ask me to be more explicit, and I will be. In my project (plugins for Adobe Framemaker) I need to work with dialogs and GUI controls. In some places I working with WinAPI controls, and some other places with FDK (internal Framemaker) controls, but I want to work throw same interface. I can't use one base class and inherite others from it, because all needed controls - is a hierarchy tree (not one class). So I have one hierarchy tree for WinAPI controls, one for FDK and one abstract tree to use anyone control. For example, there is an Edit control (WinEdit and FdkEdit realization), a Button control (WinButton and FdkButton realization) and base entity - Control (WinControl and FdkControl realization). For now I can link my classes in realization trees (Win and Fdk) with inheritence between each of them (WinControl is base class for WinButton and WinEdit; FdkControl is base class for FdkButton and FdkEdit). And I can link to abstract classes (Control is base class for WinControl and FdkControl; Edit is base class for WinEdit and FdkEdit; Button is base class for WinButton and FdkButton). But I can't link my abstract tree - compiler swears. In fact I have two hierarchy trees, that I want to inherite from another one. Update: I have done this quest! :) I used the virtual inheritence and get such scheme (http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/7782/99614779.png). Abstract tree has only absolute abstract methods. All inheritence in abstract tree are virtual. Link from realization tree to abstract are virtual. On image shown only one realization tree for simplicity. Thanks for help!

    Read the article

  • validate uniqueness amongst multiple subclasses with Single Table Inheritance

    - by irkenInvader
    I have a Card model that has many Sets and a Set model that has many Cards through a Membership model: class Card < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :memberships has_many :sets, :through => :memberships end class Membership < ActiveRecord::Base belongs_to :card belongs_to :set validates_uniqueness_of :card_id, :scope => :set_id end class Set < ActiveRecord::Base has_many :memberships has_many :cards, :through => :memberships validates_presence_of :cards end I also have some sub-classes of the above using Single Table Inheritance: class FooCard < Card end class BarCard < Card end and class Expansion < Set end class GameSet < Set validates_size_of :cards, :is => 10 end All of the above is working as I intend. What I'm trying to figure out is how to validate that a Card can only belong to a single Expansion. I want the following to be invalid: some_cards = FooCard.all( :limit => 25 ) first_expansion = Expansion.new second_expansion = Expansion.new first_expansion.cards = some_cards second_expansion.cards = some_cards first_expansion.save # Valid second_expansion.save # **Should be invalid** However, GameSets should allow this behavior: other_cards = FooCard.all( :limit => 10 ) first_set = GameSet.new second_set = GameSet.new first_set.cards = other_cards # Valid second_set.cards = other_cards # Also valid I'm guessing that a validates_uniqueness_of call is needed somewhere, but I'm not sure where to put it. Any suggestions? UPDATE 1 I modified the Expansion class as sugested: class Expansion < Set validate :validates_uniqueness_of_cards def validates_uniqueness_of_cards membership = Membership.find( :first, :include => :set, :conditions => [ "card_id IN (?) AND sets.type = ?", self.cards.map(&:id), "Expansion" ] ) errors.add_to_base("a Card can only belong to a single Expansion") unless membership.nil? end end This works when creating initial expansions to validate that no current expansions contain the cards. However, this (falsely) invalidates future updates to the expansion with new cards. In other words: old_exp = Expansion.find(1) old_exp.card_ids # returns [1,2,3,4,5] new_exp = Expansion.new new_exp.card_ids = [6,7,8,9,10] new_exp.save # returns true new_exp.card_ids << [11,12] # no other Expansion contains these cards new_exp.valid? # returns false ... SHOULD be true

    Read the article

  • Does this inheritance design belong in the database?

    - by Berryl
    === CLARIFICATION ==== The 'answers' older than March are not answers to the question in this post! Hello In my domain I need to track allocations of time spent on Activities by resources. There are two general types of Activities of interest - ones base on a Project and ones based on an Account. The notion of Project and Account have other features totally unrelated to both each other and capturing allocations of time, and each is modeled as a table in the database. For a given Allocation of time however, it makes sense to not care whether the allocation was made to either a Project or an Account, so an ActivityBase class abstracts away the difference. An ActivityBase is either a ProjectActivity or an AccountingActivity (object model is below). Back to the database though, there is no direct value in having tables for ProjectActivity and AccountingActivity. BUT the Allocation table needs to store something in the column for it's ActivityBase. Should that something be the Id of the Project / Account or a reference to tables for ProjectActivity / Accounting? How would the mapping look? === Current Db Mapping (Fluent) ==== Below is how the mapping currently looks: public class ActivityBaseMap : IAutoMappingOverride<ActivityBase> { public void Override(AutoMapping<ActivityBase> mapping) { //mapping.IgnoreProperty(x => x.BusinessId); //mapping.IgnoreProperty(x => x.Description); //mapping.IgnoreProperty(x => x.TotalTime); mapping.IgnoreProperty(x => x.UniqueId); } } public class AccountingActivityMap : SubclassMap<AccountingActivity> { public void Override(AutoMapping<AccountingActivity> mapping) { mapping.References(x => x.Account); } } public class ProjectActivityMap : SubclassMap<ProjectActivity> { public void Override(AutoMapping<ProjectActivity> mapping) { mapping.References(x => x.Project); } } There are two odd smells here. Firstly, the inheritance chain adds nothing in the way of properties - it simply adapts Projects and Accounts into a common interface so that either can be used in an Allocation. Secondly, the properties in the ActivityBase interface are redundant to keep in the db, since that information is available in Projects and Accounts. Cheers, Berryl ==== Domain ===== public class Allocation : Entity { ... public virtual ActivityBase Activity { get; private set; } ... } public abstract class ActivityBase : Entity { public virtual string BusinessId { get; protected set; } public virtual string Description { get; protected set; } public virtual ICollection<Allocation> Allocations { get { return _allocations.Values; } } public virtual TimeQuantity TotalTime { get { return TimeQuantity.Hours(Allocations.Sum(x => x.TimeSpent.Amount)); } } } public class ProjectActivity : ActivityBase { public virtual Project Project { get; private set; } public ProjectActivity(Project project) { BusinessId = project.Code.ToString(); Description = project.Description; Project = project; } }

    Read the article

  • Why do we need private variables?

    - by rak
    Why do we need private variables in classes in the context of programming? Every book on programming I've read says this is a private variable, this is how you define it but stops there. The wording of these explanations always seemed to me like we really have a crisis of trust in our profession. The explanations always sounded like other programmers are out to mess up our code. Yet, there are many programming languages that do not have private variables. What do private variables help prevent? How do you decide if a particular of properties should be private or not? If by default every field SHOULD be private then why are there public data members in a class? Under what circumstances should a variable be made public?

    Read the article

  • java inheritance keyword super()

    - by gucciv12
    requirement: Given the class 'ReadOnly' with the following behavior: A (protected) integer instance variable named 'val'. A constructor that accepts an integer and assigns the value of the parameter to the instance variable 'val'. A method name 'getVal' that returns the value of 'val'. Write a subclass named 'ReadWrite' with the following additional behavior: Any necessary constructors. a method named 'setVal' that accepts an integer parameter and assigns it the the 'val' instance variable. a method 'isDirty' that returns true if the setVal method was used to override the value of the 'val' variable. Code class ReadWrite extends ReadOnly { super(int val); void setVal(int val){this.val = val;} boolean isDirty() {if (setVal()(return true)) else return false;}} More Hints: ?     You should be using: modified ?     You should be using: private ?     You should be using: public

    Read the article

  • Why can't sub-packages see package private classes?

    - by Polaris878
    Okay so, I have this project structure: package A.B class SuperClass (this class is marked package private) package A.B.C class SubClass (inherits from super class) I'd rather not make SuperClass publicly visible... It is really just a utility class for this specific project (A.B). It seems to me that SubClass should be able to see SuperClass, because package A.B.C is a subpackage of A.B... but this is not the case. What would be the best way to resolve this issue? I don't think it makes sense to move everything in A.B.C up to A.B or move A.B down to A.B.C... mainly because there will probably be an A.B.D which inherits from stuff in A.B as well... I'm a bit new to Java, so be nice :D (I'm a C++ and .NET guy)

    Read the article

  • Question regarding inheritance in wxWidgets.

    - by celestialorb
    Currently I'm attempting to write my own wxObject, and I would like for the class to be based off of the wxTextCtrl class. Currently this is what I have: class CommandTextCtrl : public wxTextCtrl { public: void OnKey(wxKeyEvent& event); private: DECLARE_EVENT_TABLE() }; Then later on I have this line of code, which is doesn't like: CommandTextCtrl *ctrl = new CommandTextCtrl(panel, wxID_ANY, *placeholder, *origin, *size); ...and when I attempt to compile the program I receive this error: error: no matching function for call to ‘CommandTextCtrl::CommandTextCtrl(wxPanel*&, <anonymous enum>, const wxString&, const wxPoint&, const wxSize&)’ It seems that it doesn't inherit the constructor method with wxTextCtrl. Does anyone happen to know why it doesn't inherit the constructor? Thanks in advance for any help!

    Read the article

  • Templates, interfaces (multiple inheritance) and static functions (named constructors)

    - by fledgling Cxx user
    Setup I have a graph library where I am trying to decompose things as much as possible, and the cleanest way to describe it that I found is the following: there is a vanilla type node implementing only a list of edges: class node { public: int* edges; int edge_count; }; Then, I would like to be able to add interfaces to this whole mix, like so: template <class T> class node_weight { public: T weight; }; template <class T> class node_position { public: T x; T y; }; and so on. Then, the actual graph class comes in, which is templated on the actual type of node: template <class node_T> class graph { protected: node_T* nodes; public: static graph cartesian(int n, int m) { graph r; r.nodes = new node_T[n * m]; return r; } }; The twist is that it has named constructors which construct some special graphs, like a Cartesian lattice. In this case, I would like to be able to add some extra information into the graph, depending on what interfaces are implemented by node_T. What would be the best way to accomplish this? Possible solution I thought of the following humble solution, through dynamic_cast<>: template <class node_T, class weight_T, class position_T> class graph { protected: node_T* nodes; public: static graph cartesian(int n, int m) { graph r; r.nodes = new node_T[n * m]; if (dynamic_cast<node_weight<weight_T>>(r.nodes[0]) != nullptr) { // do stuff knowing you can add weights } if (dynamic_cast<node_position<positionT>>(r.nodes[0]) != nullptr) { // do stuff knowing you can set position } return r; } }; which would operate on node_T being the following: template <class weight_T, class position_T> class node_weight_position : public node, public node_weight<weight_T>, public node_position<position_T> { // ... }; Questions Is this -- philosophically -- the right way to go? I know people don't look nicely at multiple inheritance, though with "interfaces" like these it should all be fine. There are unfortunately problems with this. From what I know at least, dynamic_cast<> involves quite a bit of run-time overhead. Hence, I run into a problem with what I had solved earlier: writing graph algorithms that require weights independently of whether the actual node_T class has weights or not. The solution with this 'interface' approach would be to write a function: template <class node_T, class weight_T> inline weight_T get_weight(node_T const & n) { if (dynamic_cast<node_weight<weight_T>>(n) != nullptr) { return dynamic_cast<node_weight<weight_T>>(n).weight; } return T(1); } but the issue with it is that it works using run-time information (dynamic_cast), yet in principle I would like to decide it at compile-time and thus make the code more efficient. If there is a different solution that would solve both problems, especially a cleaner and better one than what I have, I would love to hear about it!

    Read the article

  • Inaccessible item using C++ inheritance

    - by shinjuo
    I am working on C++ project that uses inheritance. I seem to have an error in visual studio in the below file administrator.h. It says that salariedemploye:salary on line 17 is inaccessible and I am not sure why. Admin.cpp #include namespace SavitchEmployees { Administrator::Administrator( ):SalariedEmployee(), salary(0) { //deliberately empty } Administrator::Administrator(const string& theName, const string& theSsn, double theAnnualSalary) :SalariedEmployee(theName, theSsn),salary(theAnnualSalary) { //deliberately empty } void Administrator::inputAdminData() { cout << " Enter the details of the administrator " << getName() << endl; cout << " Enter the admin title" << endl; getline(cin, adminTitle); cout << " Enter the area of responsibility " << endl; getline(cin, workingArea); cout << " Enter the immediate supervisor's name " << endl; getline(cin, supervisorName); } void Administrator::outputAdminData() { cout << "Name: " << getName() << endl; cout << "Title: " << adminTitle << endl; cout << "Area of responsibility: " << workingArea << endl; cout << "Immediate supervisor: " << supervisorName << endl; } void Administrator::printCheck() { setNetPay(salary); cout << "\n___________________________________\n" << "Pay to the order of " << getName() << endl << "The sum of" << getNetPay() << "Dollars\n" << "______________________________________\n" << "Check Stub Not negotiable \n" << "Employee Number: " << getSsn() << endl << "Salaried Employee(Administrator). Regular Pay: " << salary << endl << "______________________________________\n"; } } admin.h #include <iostream> #include "salariedemployee.h" using std::endl; using std::string; namespace SavitchEmployees { class Administrator : public SalariedEmployee { public: Administrator(); Administrator(const string& theName, const string& theSsn, double salary); double getSalary() const; void inputAdminData(); void outputAdminData(); void printCheck(); private: string adminTitle;//administrator's title string workingArea;//area of responsibility string supervisorName;//immediate supervisor }; } #endif SalariedEmployee.cpp namespace SavitchEmployees { SalariedEmployee::SalariedEmployee():Employee(),salary(0) { //deliberately empty } SalariedEmployee::SalariedEmployee(const string& theName, const string& theNumber, double theWeeklyPay) :Employee(theName, theNumber), salary(theWeeklyPay) { //deliberately empty } double SalariedEmployee::getSalary() const { return salary; } void SalariedEmployee::setSalary(double newSalary) { salary = newSalary; } void SalariedEmployee::printCheck() { setNetPay(salary); cout << "\n___________________________________\n" << "Pay to the order of " << getName() << endl << "The sum of" << getNetPay() << "Dollars\n" << "______________________________________\n" << "Check Stub NOT NEGOTIABLE \n" << "Employee Number: " << getSsn() << endl << "Salaried Employee. Regular Pay: " << salary << endl << "______________________________________\n"; } } Salariedemplyee.h #ifndef SALARIEDEMPLOYEE_H #define SALARIEDEMPLOYEE_H #include <string> #include "employee.h" namespace SavitchEmployees{ class SalariedEmployee : public Employee{ public: SalariedEmployee(); SalariedEmployee(const string& theName, const string& theSsn, double theWeeklySalary); double getSalary() const; void setSalary(double newSalary); void printCheck(); private: double salary; }; } #endif employee.cpp namespace SavitchEmployees { Employee::Employee():name("No name yet"),ssn("No number yet"),netPay(0){} Employee::Employee(const string& theName, const string& theSsn):name(theName),ssn(theSsn),netPay(0){} string Employee::getName() const { return name; } string Employee::getSsn() const { return ssn; } double Employee::getNetPay() const { return netPay; } void Employee::setName(const string& newName) { name = newName; } void Employee::setSsn(const string& newSsn) { ssn = newSsn; } void Employee::setNetPay(double newNetPay) { netPay = newNetPay; } void Employee::printCheck() const { cout << "\nERROR: pringCheck function called for an \n" << "Undifferentiated employee. Aborting the program!\n" << "Check with the author of this program about thos bug. \n"; exit(1); } }

    Read the article

  • Compile error on inheritance of generic inner class extending with bounds

    - by Arne Burmeister
    I have a problem when compiling a generic class with an inner class. The class extends a generic class, the inner class also. Here the interface implemented: public interface IndexIterator<Element> extends Iterator<Element> { ... } The generic super class: public abstract class CompoundCollection<Element, Part extends Collection<Element>> implements Collection<Element> { ... protected class CompoundIterator<Iter extends Iterator<Element>> extends ImmutableIterator<Element> { ... } } The generic subclass with the compiler error: public class CompoundList<Element> extends CompoundCollection<Element, List<Element>> implements List<Element> { ... private class CompoundIndexIterator extends CompoundIterator<IndexIterator<Element>> implements IndexIterator<Element> { ... } } The error is: type parameter diergo.collect.IndexIterator<Element> is not within its bound extends CompoundIterator<IndexIterator<Element>> ^ What is wrong? The code compiles with eclipse, but bot with java 5 compiler (I use ant with java 5 on a mac and eclipse 3.5). No, I cannot convert it to a static inner class.

    Read the article

  • Tuple struct constructor complains about private fields

    - by Grubermensch
    I am working on a basic shell interpreter to familiarize myself with Rust. While working on the table for storing suspended jobs in the shell, I have gotten stuck at the following compiler error message: tsh.rs:8:18: 8:31 error: cannot invoke tuple struct constructor with private fields tsh.rs:8 let mut jobs = job::JobsList(vec![]); ^~~~~~~~~~~~~ It's unclear to me what is being seen as private here. As you can see below, both of the structs are tagged with pub in my module file. So, what's the secret sauce? tsh.rs use std::io; mod job; fn main() { // Initialize jobs list let mut jobs = job::JobsList(vec![]); loop { /*** Shell runtime loop ***/ } } job.rs use std::fmt; pub struct Job { jid: int, pid: int, cmd: String } impl fmt::Show for Job { /*** Formatter ***/ } pub struct JobsList(Vec<Job>); impl fmt::Show for JobsList { /*** Formatter ***/ }

    Read the article

  • J2ME private folder(only accessible to my midlet)

    - by Shankar
    I have two midlets, one will download some files form server everyday and the other uses these files. If i download the files to a normal folder the mobile user may delete the folder or files manually. So i need a private folder which is hidden and only accessible for my midlets. I heard about private folders which symbian platform provides for each application which are not accessible to users. I need such a folder for my j2me app. How to create such folder?? Shankar

    Read the article

  • How to Access a Private Variable?

    - by SoulBeaver
    This question isn't meant to sound as blatantly insulting as it probably is right now. This is a homework assignment, and the spec sheet is scarce and poorly designed to say the least. We have a function: double refuel( int liter, GasStation *gs ) { // TODO: Access private variable MaxFuel of gs and decrement. } Sound simple enough? It should be, but the class GasStation comes with no function that accesses the private variable MaxFuel. So how can I access it anyway using the function refuel? I'm not considering creating a function setFuel( int liter ) because the teacher always complains rather energetically if I change his specification. So... I guess I have to do some sort of hack around it, but I'm not sure how to go about this without explicitely changing the only function in GasStation and giving it a parameter so that I can call it here. Any hints perhaps?

    Read the article

  • A pragmatic view on private vs public

    - by Denis Gorbachev
    Hello everybody! I've always wondered on the topic of public, protected and private properties. My memory can easily recall times when I had to hack somebody's code, and having the hacked-upon class variables declared as private was always upsetting. Also, there were (more) times I've written a class myself, and had never recognized any potential gain of privatizing the property. I should note here that using public vars is not in my habit: I adhere to the principles of OOP by utilizing getters and setters. So, what's the whole point in these restrictions?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15  | Next Page >