Search Results

Search found 119 results on 5 pages for 'traits'.

Page 1/5 | 1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >

  • Class member functions instantiated by traits

    - by Jive Dadson
    I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched Stack Overflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state information was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (VC++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice? UPDATE: Here's another try at explaining it. I want the user to be able to fill out an order (manifest) for a custom optimizer, something like ordering off of a Chinese menu - one from column A, one from column B, etc.. Waiter, from column A (updaters), I'll have the BFGS update with Cholesky-decompositon sauce. From column B (line-searchers), I'll have the cubic interpolation line-search with an eta of 0.4 and a rho of 1e-4, please. Etc... UPDATE: Okay, okay. Here's the playing-around that I've done. I offer it reluctantly, because I suspect it's a completely wrong-headed approach. It runs okay under vc++ 2008. #include <boost/utility.hpp> #include <boost/type_traits/integral_constant.hpp> namespace dj { struct CBFGS { void bar() {printf("CBFGS::bar %d\n", data);} CBFGS(): data(1234){} int data; }; template<class T> struct is_CBFGS: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_CBFGS<CBFGS>: boost::true_type{}; struct LMQN {LMQN(): data(54.321){} void bar() {printf("LMQN::bar %lf\n", data);} double data; }; template<class T> struct is_LMQN: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_LMQN<LMQN> : boost::true_type{}; struct default_optimizer_traits { typedef CBFGS update_type; }; template<class traits> class Optimizer; template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_LMQN<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf(" LMQN %lf\n", self.data); } template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_CBFGS<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf("CBFGS %d\n", self.data); } template<class traits = default_optimizer_traits> class Optimizer{ friend typename traits::update_type; //friend void dj::foo<traits>(typename Optimizer<traits> & self); // How? public: //void foo(void); // How??? void foo() { dj::foo<traits>(*this); } void bar() { data.bar(); } //protected: // How? typedef typename traits::update_type update_type; update_type data; }; } // namespace dj int main_() { dj::Optimizer<> opt; opt.foo(); opt.bar(); std::getchar(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • Class member functions instantiated by traits [policies, actually]

    - by Jive Dadson
    I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched Stack Overflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate member functions? [Update: I used the wrong term here. It should be "policies" rather than "traits." Traits describe existing classes. Policies prescribe synthetic classes.] The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state information was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (VC++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice? UPDATE: Here's another try at explaining it. I want the user to be able to fill out an order (manifest) for a custom optimizer, something like ordering off of a Chinese menu - one from column A, one from column B, etc.. Waiter, from column A (updaters), I'll have the BFGS update with Cholesky-decompositon sauce. From column B (line-searchers), I'll have the cubic interpolation line-search with an eta of 0.4 and a rho of 1e-4, please. Etc... UPDATE: Okay, okay. Here's the playing-around that I've done. I offer it reluctantly, because I suspect it's a completely wrong-headed approach. It runs okay under vc++ 2008. #include <boost/utility.hpp> #include <boost/type_traits/integral_constant.hpp> namespace dj { struct CBFGS { void bar() {printf("CBFGS::bar %d\n", data);} CBFGS(): data(1234){} int data; }; template<class T> struct is_CBFGS: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_CBFGS<CBFGS>: boost::true_type{}; struct LMQN {LMQN(): data(54.321){} void bar() {printf("LMQN::bar %lf\n", data);} double data; }; template<class T> struct is_LMQN: boost::false_type{}; template<> struct is_LMQN<LMQN> : boost::true_type{}; // "Order form" struct default_optimizer_traits { typedef CBFGS update_type; // Selection from column A - updaters }; template<class traits> class Optimizer; template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_LMQN<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf(" LMQN %lf\n", self.data); } template<class traits> void foo(typename boost::enable_if<is_CBFGS<typename traits::update_type>, Optimizer<traits> >::type& self) { printf("CBFGS %d\n", self.data); } template<class traits = default_optimizer_traits> class Optimizer{ friend typename traits::update_type; //friend void dj::foo<traits>(typename Optimizer<traits> & self); // How? public: //void foo(void); // How??? void foo() { dj::foo<traits>(*this); } void bar() { data.bar(); } //protected: // How? typedef typename traits::update_type update_type; update_type data; }; } // namespace dj int main() { dj::Optimizer<> opt; opt.foo(); opt.bar(); std::getchar(); return 0; }

    Read the article

  • C++ traits question

    - by duli
    I have a templated class template <typename Data> class C { ..... } In most situations, I depend on the compiler to let me substitute types for Data. I call methods foo(), goo() on objects of type Data, so what I substitute needs to provide that. I now need to substitute int and string for my Data type. I do not want to specialize because the class is already too big and would require specializing each method (with only small code change). My options (please tell me if there are more) 1) I can provide wrapper classes around int and string which implement the methods foo(), goo() etc 2) provide a traits class traits that calls foo() or goo() on objects of classes that provide foo(),goo() (these are my present substitutable classes) and specialize these classes for int and string. Questions 1) what are the relative merits of 1 vs 2? 2) My traits classes will have static methods. Can a traits class have non-static methods as well? I see most traits classes define constants in the STL. 3) Do I make the traits classes global or should I pass them in as a template parameter for class C?

    Read the article

  • Error using traits class.: "expected constructor destructor or type conversion before '&' token"

    - by Mark
    I have a traits class that's used for printing out different character types: template <typename T> class traits { public: static std::basic_ostream<T>& tout; }; template<> std::ostream& traits<char>::tout = std::cout; template<> std::wostream& traits<unsigned short>::tout = std::wcout; gcc (g++) version 3.4.5 (yes somewhat old) is throwing an error: "expected constructor destructor or type conversion before '&' token" And I'm wondering if there's a good way to resolve this. (it's also angry about _O_WTEXT so if anyone's got some insight into that, I'd also appreciate it)

    Read the article

  • How to explain traits?

    - by Partial
    How would you explain traits to a new C++ programmer? How would you explain traits to a C programmer? How would you explain traits to a Java/Ruby/Python/C# or any other OOP language programmer?

    Read the article

  • c++ class member functions selected by traits

    - by Jive Dadson
    I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched stackoverflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instatiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state info was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • c++ class member functions instatiated by traits

    - by Jive Dadson
    I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched stackoverflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state info was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (vc++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • C++ class member functions instantiated by traits

    - by Jive Dadson
    I am reluctant to say I can't figure this out, but I can't figure this out. I've googled and searched Stack Overflow, and come up empty. The abstract, and possibly overly vague form of the question is, how can I use the traits-pattern to instantiate non-virtual member functions? The question came up while modernizing a set of multivariate function optimizers that I wrote more than 10 years ago. The optimizers all operate by selecting a straight-line path through the parameter space away from the current best point (the "update"), then finding a better point on that line (the "line search"), then testing for the "done" condition, and if not done, iterating. There are different methods for doing the update, the line-search, and conceivably for the done test, and other things. Mix and match. Different update formulae require different state-variable data. For example, the LMQN update requires a vector, and the BFGS update requires a matrix. If evaluating gradients is cheap, the line-search should do so. If not, it should use function evaluations only. Some methods require more accurate line-searches than others. Those are just some examples. The original version instantiates several of the combinations by means of virtual functions. Some traits are selected by setting mode bits that are tested at runtime. Yuck. It would be trivial to define the traits with #define's and the member functions with #ifdef's and macros. But that's so twenty years ago. It bugs me that I cannot figure out a whiz-bang modern way. If there were only one trait that varied, I could use the curiously recurring template pattern. But I see no way to extend that to arbitrary combinations of traits. I tried doing it using boost::enable_if, etc.. The specialized state information was easy. I managed to get the functions done, but only by resorting to non-friend external functions that have the this-pointer as a parameter. I never even figured out how to make the functions friends, much less member functions. The compiler (VC++ 2008) always complained that things didn't match. I would yell, "SFINAE, you moron!" but the moron is probably me. Perhaps tag-dispatch is the key. I haven't gotten very deeply into that. Surely it's possible, right? If so, what is best practice?

    Read the article

  • Traits of a DBA - Part One – The Technical Side

    What does it take to become a database administrator, or what kinds of traits should I be looking for when I am hiring a DBA. Those traits can be summarized it two categories: Technical and Personal. In this article, Greg Larsen discusses the technical traits a DBA should have. Free eBook - Performance Tuning with DMVsThis free eBook provides you with the core techniques and scripts to monitor your query execution, index usage, session and transaction activity, disk IO, and more. Download the free eBook.

    Read the article

  • traits in php – any real world examples/best practices?

    - by Max
    Traits have been one of the biggest additions for PHP 5.4. I know the synatax and understand the idea behind traits, like horizontal code re-usage for common stuff like logging, security, caching etc. However, I still dont know yet how I would make use of traits in my projects. Are there any open source projects that already use traits? Any good articles/reading material on how to structure architectures using traits?

    Read the article

  • Get the signed/unsigned variant of an integer template parameter without explicit traits

    - by Blair Holloway
    I am looking to define a template class whose template parameter will always be an integer type. The class will contain two members, one of type T, and the other as the unsigned variant of type T -- i.e. if T == int, then T_Unsigned == unsigned int. My first instinct was to do this: template <typename T> class Range { typedef unsigned T T_Unsigned; // does not compile public: Range(T min, T_Unsigned range); private: T m_min; T_Unsigned m_range; }; But it doesn't work. I then thought about using partial template specialization, like so: template <typename T> struct UnsignedType {}; // deliberately empty template <> struct UnsignedType<int> { typedef unsigned int Type; }; template <typename T> class Range { typedef UnsignedType<T>::Type T_Unsigned; /* ... */ }; This works, so long as you partially specialize UnsignedType for every integer type. It's a little bit of additional copy-paste work (slash judicious use of macros), but serviceable. However, I'm now curious - is there another way of determining the signed-ness of an integer type, and/or using the unsigned variant of a type, without having to manually define a Traits class per-type? Or is this the only way to do it?

    Read the article

  • lambda traits inconsistency across C++0x compilers

    - by Sumant
    I observed some inconsistency between two compilers (g++ 4.5, VS2010 RC) in the way they match lambdas with partial specializations of class templates. I was trying to implement something like boost::function_types for lambdas to extract type traits. Check this for more details. In g++ 4.5, the type of the operator() of a lambda appears to be like that of a free standing function (R (*)(...)) whereas in VS2010 RC, it appears to be like that of a member function (R (C::*)(...)). So the question is are compiler writers free to interpret any way they want? If not, which compiler is correct? See the details below. template <typename T> struct function_traits : function_traits<decltype(&T::operator())> { // This generic template is instantiated on both the compilers as expected. }; template <typename R, typename C> struct function_traits<R (C::*)() const> { // inherits from this one on VS2010 RC typedef R result_type; }; template <typename R> struct function_traits<R (*)()> { // // inherits from this one g++ 4.5 typedef R result_type; }; int main(void) { auto lambda = []{}; function_traits<decltype(lambda)>::result_type *r; // void * } This program compiles on both g++ 4.5 and VS2010 but the function_traits that are instantiated are different as noted in the code.

    Read the article

  • PHP 5.4 Support: Traits

    - by Ondrej Brejla
    Hi all! Today we would like to intorduce you another new PHP 5.4 feature for NetBeans 7.2 which is called Traits. Note: All PHP 5.4 features are available in your projects after setting Project Properties -> Sources -> PHP Version to PHP 5.4 value, or after choosing the same value during a PHP Project creation (in New Project Wizard). If you don't know, what Traits are, just look at the official documentation, or RFC. So what is that exact Trait support in NetBeans? Syntax is recognized correctly and code completion offers declared, inherited stuff from used traits. Note: Just one thing is not supported yet - resolving name conflicts and aliasing of method names (it means that you will not have these "virtual" names in your code completion). We would like to implement it in some next NetBeans release. Sorry for any inconvenience. That's all for today and as usual, please test it and if you find something strange, don't hesitate to file a new issue (component php, subcomponent Editor). Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Scala traits and implicit conversion confusion

    - by pr1001
    The following lines work when I enter them by hand on the Scala REPL (2.7.7): trait myTrait { override def toString = "something" } implicit def myTraitToString(input: myTrait): String = input.toString object myObject extends myTrait val s: String = myObject However, if I try to compile file with it I get the following error: [error] myTrait.scala:37: expected start of definition [error] implicit def myTraitToString(input: myTrait): String = input.toString [error] ^ Why? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Scala: Mixing traits with private fields

    - by Vilius Normantas
    It's not much of a question, it's rather my excitement that it's possible at all! I wrote this little example just to prove the opposite - I expected either a compiler error or one of the values (111 or 222, I wasn't sure). scala> trait T1 { private val v = 111; def getValueT1 = v } scala> trait T2 { private val v = 222; def getValueT2 = v } scala> class T12 extends T1 with T2 scala> val t = new T12 scala> t.getValueT1 res9: Int = 111 scala> t.getValueT2 res10: Int = 222 Why doesn't the v get overridden? Off course this works only as long as vs are private, but still.

    Read the article

  • How are Scala traits compiled into Java bytecode?

    - by Justin Ardini
    I have played around with Scala for a while now, and I know that traits can act as the Scala equivalent of both interfaces and abstract classes. Recently I've been wondering how exactly traits are compiled into Java bytecode. I found some short explanations that stated traits are compiled exactly like Java interfaces when possible, and interfaces with an additional class otherwise. I still don't understand, however, how Scala achieves class linearization, a feature not available in Java. Could anyone explain or provide a good source explains how traits compile to Java bytecode?

    Read the article

  • Detecting const-ness of nested type

    - by Channel72
    Normally, if I need to detect whether a type is const I just use boost::is_const. However, I ran into trouble when trying to detect the const-ness of a nested type. Consider the following traits template, which is specialized for const types: template <class T> struct traits { typedef T& reference; }; template <class T> struct traits<const T> { typedef T const& reference; }; The problem is that boost::is_const doesn't seem to detect that traits<const T>::reference is a const type. For example: std::cout << std::boolalpha; std::cout << boost::is_const<traits<int>::reference>::value << " "; std::cout << boost::is_const<traits<const int>::reference>::value << std::endl; This outputs: false false Why doesn't it output false true?

    Read the article

  • C++ Design Question on template types

    - by user231536
    I have a templated class template <typename T> class MyContainerClass For types to be substituted for T, it has to satisfy many requirements: for example, get_id(), int data(), etc. Obviously none of the fundamental types (PODs) are substitutable. One way I can provide this is via wrappers for the PODs that provide these functions. Is this an acceptable way? Another way would be to change the template to: template < typename T, typename C=traits<T> > class MyContainerClass and inside MyContainerClass, call traits::data() instead of data() on T objects. I will specialize traits<int>, traits<const char *> etc. Is this good design ? How do I design such a traits class (completely static methods or allow for inheritance) ? Or are the wrapper classes a good solution? What other alternatives are there?

    Read the article

  • Scala model-view-presenter, traits

    - by Ralph
    I am a fan of Martin Fowler's (deprecated) model-view-presenter pattern. I am writing a Scala view class containing several button classes. I would like to include methods to set the action properties of the buttons, to be called by the presenter. A typical code fragment looks like this: private val aButton = new JButton def setAButtonAction(action: Action): Unit = { aButton.setAction(action) } This code is repeated for each button. If Java/Scala had the C preprocessor, I would create a macro to generate this code, given the button name (no lectures on the evils of the C preprocessor, please). This code is obviously very verbose and repetitive. Is there any better way way to do this in Scala, perhaps using traits? Please hold the lectures about scala.swing. I looking for a general pattern here.

    Read the article

  • The lifecycle of "cool"

    - by Dori
    I've been thinking lately about how some programming projects/products become "cool," and in particular, how that trend can later reverse. Here are two examples that might better explain my context: Textmate Whenever someone asks about text editors on OS X, the answer on the SE sites is an automatic "Textmate!" But looked at objectively: Textmate 1.0 shipped October 2004 Textmate 1.5 shipped January 2006 Textmate 2 was announced February 2006 As of September 2010, the currently shipping version is 1.5.9 In all of 2010, there have been a total of three posts on the Textmate blog At what point (if ever) do Textmate fans start thinking about switching to another text editor? When it breaks after some future Apple update? When alpha geeks they respect start recommending something else? Or? jQuery Whenever a JavaScript-related question is asked on the SE sites, the knee-jerk response is "jQuery!" I've seen it happen even when the question itself only required a single line of JavaScript. Or when the question could be better answered by using CSS. Do the answerers understand they're suggesting a blowtorch to light a candle? That they're recommending adding 70K or so of code to do something trivial? Or is it a symptom of "When you have a hammer, everything looks like a nail"—that is, jQuery is all they know how to do, so that's their recommendation? And do they understand that while they may know jQuery well, that doesn't necessarily mean that they know JavaScript? Is there a way to explain that learning JavaScript would make them better jQuery programmers? My bigger-picture questions: Is this niche focus primarily a trait of programmers? How do you get programmers to not immediately jump to recommending their personal favorites? What can motivate programmers to review their initial selection criteria and possibly modify their choice? Your thoughts?

    Read the article

  • Usage of @specialized in traits

    - by paradigmatic
    I have a trait and an implementation looking like: trait Foo[A] { def bar[B >: A: Ordering]: Foo[B] } class FooImpl[A]( val a: A, val values: List[Foo[A]] ) extends Foo[A] { def bar[B >: A] = { /* concrete implementation */} } I would like to use the @specialized annotation on A and B to avoid autoboxing. Do I need to use it in both trait and implementation, only in implementation, or only in trait ?

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5  | Next Page >