I have something like this:
enum EFood{
eMeat,
eFruit
};
class Food{
};
class Meat: public Food{
void someMeatFunction();
};
class Fruit: public Food{
void someFruitFunction();
};
class FoodFactory{
vector<Food*> allTheFood;
Food* createFood(EFood foodType){
Food* food=NULL;
switch(foodType){
case eMeat:
food = new Meat();
break;
case eFruit:
food = new Fruit();
break;
}
if(food)
allTheFood.push_back(food);
return food;
}
};
int foo(){
Fruit* fruit = dynamic_cast<Fruit*>(myFoodFactory->createFood(eFruit));
if(fruit)
fruit->someFruitFunction();
}
now I want to change my application to use boost shared_ptr and weak_ptr such that i can delete my food instance in a single place. it would look like this:
class FoodFactory{
vector<shared_ptr<Food> > allTheFood;
weak_ptr<Food> createFood(EFood foodType){
Food* food=NULL;
switch(foodType){
case eMeat:
food = new Meat();
break;
case eFruit:
food = new Fruit();
break;
}
shared_ptr<Food> ptr(food);
allTheFood.push_back(ptr);
return weak_ptr<Food>(ptr);
}
};
int foo(){
weak_ptr<Fruit> fruit = dynamic_cast<weak_ptr<Fruit> >(myFoodFactory->createFood(eFruit));
if(shared_ptr<Fruit> fruitPtr = fruit.lock())
fruitPtr->someFruitFunction();
}
but the problem is that the dynamic_cast doesn't seem to work with weak_ptr
how do I get a weak_ptr<Fruit> out of a weak_ptr<Food> if i know that the object it points to is of derived type?
Direct casting from weak_ptr<A> to weak_ptr<B> will surely don't work, I think you have to convert it to a shared_ptr and then use the casting functionality of shared_ptr:
weak_ptr<Food> food = myFoodFactory->createFood(eFruit)
weak_ptr<Fruit> fruit = weak_ptr<Fruit>(dynamic_pointer_cast<Fruit>(food.lock());
You cannot use dynamic_cast with shared_ptr because it would require to change the template of the object. What in fact you want to do is a dynamic_cast on the internal pointer. To do this you could do a dynamic_cast on the pointer returned by get but that would not be so clean because the reference would not be shared(irrelevant in your case since you're using weak_ptr but relevant when using shared_ptr) and creating a share_ptr on this would be undefined resulting on a double delete.
Use dynamic_pointer_cast to do this but the two types still need to be related. In other words dynamic_cast<T*>(r.get()) needs to be well formed.
you can use BOOST_DISABLE_THREADS to improve performance if you're not bound to multithreading, see https://stackoverflow.com/a/8966130/1067933
Related
A constructor for MyClass takes a pointer to another such object.
The C++ MyClass is functionally the same as a C "class" based on a typedef'd struct called MyType_T. (The C++ class is basically a wrapper to the old C code.) I'd like to be able to pass in a MyClass* anywhere I could pass in a MyType_T* before.
I'd like to write an automatic conversion of any MyClass* to MyType_T*, but I guess what's throwing me is that my type converter is written to take a MyClass not a MyClass*. Even though I'm sure that's the problem, I can't think of what syntax would solve it. I've thought about making a friend implementation of the cast, but I can't put it before the definition of class MyClass because it won't know the offset of thing. And I can't put after the definition of class MyClass because the MyClass constructor wants to use that conversion.
typedef struct MyStruct {
int iFoo;
struct MyType* ptypeParent;
} MyType_T;
void MyTypeCreator( MyType_T* ptypeSelf, int iFoo_in, MyType_T* ptypeParent );
class MyClass {
public:
MyClass( int iFoo, MyClass* pclassParent ) {
MyTypeCreator( &thing, iFoo, pclassParent ); <--------------- PROBLEM
MyTypeCreator( &thing, iFoo, &pclassParent->thing ); <------- WORKS
};
operator MyType_T*() { return &thing; } <---------------- INCORRECT: attempts to convert MyClass, not MyClass*, to MyType_T*.
MyType_T thing;
};
QUESTION 1: how to write a convertor from MyClass* instead of MyClass?
QUESTION 2: how can such a convertor check for NULL input? (If thing isn't offset of 0, but say 8, then converting from a NULL pclass without a check would give a value of 0x00000008, not NULL...)
I got 2 classes that represent Player and I want to keep in one of them pointer to another one.
So inside my view::Player I create pointer to logic::Player
namespace view {
class Player {
std::shared_ptr<logic::Player> m_player;
//logic::Player* m_player;
public:
void create(logic::Player& player) {
m_player = std::make_shared<logic::Player>(player);
//m_player = &player;
}
};
}
view::Player is created in view::GameState and simply initialised like this
m_playerOneView.create(m_game.getActivePlayer());
m_game is logic::Game object
logic::Game has std::vector<logic::Player>, and public method that returns active one
logic::Player& logic::Game::getActivePlayer() {
return m_players[m_activePlayer];
}
And finnaly
namespace logic {
class Player {
std::string m_name;
int position;
};
}
Now I need original object of logic::Player pointed by std::shared_ptr in my view::Player class. I could simply do that by changing that to raw pointer and it works then (2 commented lines do what I want to achieve basicly). But when I try to do this on std::shared_ptr, I seem to work on copy of logic::Player, because when I update his position for example, it changes everywhere in the game but not in view::Player. How to do that using std::shared_ptr then?
I wanted to know if its possible to return a function that could either return a boolean or a void ? I know I could use std::optional however that is available only in C++17 and my code base is C++11. I would like something like this
xxx process(int a)
{
if (a==1)
return true;
if (a==2)
return false;
if (a==3)
.... //return nothing
}
For returning two values I use a std::pair (usually typedef'd).
In C++11 and newer, you should use std::tuple for more than two return results.
The abstract example using the tuple
std::tuple<bool, int> process(int a)
{
if (a==1)
return std::make_tuple(true, 0);
if (a==2)
return std::make_tuple(false, 0);
if (a==3)
return std::make_tuple(false, 1);
}
A variant might be a better match:
According to your requirement: a function that could either return a boolean or a void
See at: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/utility/variant
The class template std::variant represents a type-safe union. An
instance of std::variant at any given time either holds a value of one
of its alternative types, or it holds no value (this state is hard to
achieve, see valueless_by_exception).
If you don't want to write an equivalent of std::optional yourself use an enum.
enum class Result
{
False,
True,
Nothing // or whatever name makes sense in your use case
};
Is there a way to use enum default parameters in Haxe? I get this error:
Parameter default value should be constant
enum AnEnum {
A;
B;
C;
}
class Test {
static function main() {
Test.enumNotWorking();
}
static function enumNotWorking(e:AnEnum = AnEnum.A){}
}
Try Haxe link.
Update: this feature has been added in Haxe 4. The code example from the question now compiles as-is with a regular enum.
Previously, this was only possible if you're willing to use enum abstracts (enums at compile time, but a different type at runtime):
#:enum
abstract AnEnum(Int)
{
var A = 1;
var B = 2;
var C = 3;
}
class Test3
{
static function main()
{
nowItWorks();
}
static function nowItWorks(param = AnEnum.A)
{
trace(param);
}
}
There's nothing special about the values I chose, and you could choose another type (string, or a more complex type) if it better suits your use case. You can treat these just like regular enums (for switch statements, etc.) but note that when you trace it at runtime, you'll get "1", not "A".
More information: http://haxe.org/manual/types-abstract-enum.html
Sadly enums can't be used as default values, because in Haxe enums aren't always constant.
This piece of trivia was on the old website but apparently hasn't made it into the new manual yet:
http://old.haxe.org/ref/enums#using-enums-as-default-value-for-parameters
The workaround is to check for a null value at the start of your function:
static function enumNotWorking(?e:AnEnum){
if (e==null) e=AnEnum.A;
}
Alternatively, an Enum Abstract might work for your case.
While using SubSonic 3 with ActiveRecord T4 templates, the generated code shows many warnings about CLS-compliance, unused items, and lack of GetHashCode() implementation.
In order to avoid them, I did the following modifications:
// Structs.tt
[CLSCompliant(false)] // added
public class <#=tbl.CleanName#>Table: DatabaseTable
{ ...
// ActiveRecord.tt
[CLSCompliant(false)] // added
public partial class <#=tbl.ClassName#>: IActiveRecord
{
#region Built-in testing
#pragma warning disable 0169 // added
static IList<<#=tbl.ClassName#>> TestItems;
#pragma warning restore 0169 // added
...
public override Int32 GetHashCode() // added
{
return this.KeyValue().GetHashCode();
}
...
Is there a better way to get rid of the warnings? Or a better GetHashCode() implementation?
Currently, the only way to get rid of the warnings is to update your t4 templates and submit a bug/fix to Rob. Or wait until somebody else does.
As for the GetHashCode implementation, I don't think you're going to find a good way to do this through templates. Hash code generation is very dependent on what state your object contains. And people with lots of letters after their name work long and hard to come up with hash code algorithms that are fast and return results with low chances of collision. Doing this from within a template that may generate a class with millions of different permutations of the state it may hold is a tall order to fill.
Probably the best thing Rob could have done would be to provide a default implementation that calls out to a partial method, checks the result and returns it if found. Here's an example:
public partial class Foo
{
public override int GetHashCode()
{
int? result = null;
TryGetHashCode(ref result);
if (result.HasValue)
return result.Value;
return new Random().Next();
}
partial void TryGetHashCode(ref int? result);
}
public partial class Foo
{
partial void TryGetHashCode(ref int? result)
{
result = 5;
}
}
If you compile this without the implementation of TryGetHashCode, the compiler completely omits the call to TryGetHashCode and you go from the declaration of result to the check to see if it has value, which it never will, so the default implementation of the hash code is returned.
I wanted a quick solution for this as well. The version that I am using does generate GetHashCode for tables that have a primary key that is a single int.
As our simple tables use text as their primary keys this didn't work out of the box. So I made the following change to the template near line 273 in ActiveRecord.tt
<# if(tbl.PK.SysType=="int"){#>
public override int GetHashCode() {
return this.<#=tbl.PK.CleanName #>;
}
<# }#>
<# else{#>
public override int GetHashCode() {
throw new NotImplementedException();
}
<# }#>
This way GetHashCode is generated for all the tables and stops the warnings, but will throw an exception if called (which we aren't).
We use this is for a testing application, not a website or anything like that, and this approach may not be valid for many situations.