Assume you have many elements, and you need to keep track of the equivalence relations between them. If element A is equivalent to element B, it is equivalent to all the other elements B is equivalent to.
I am looking for an efficient data structure to encode this information. It should be possible to dynamically add new elements through an equivalence with an existing element, and from that information it should be possible to efficiently compute all the elements the new element is equivalent to.
For example, consider the following equivalence sets of the elements [0,1,2,3,4]:
0 = 1 = 2
3 = 4
where the equality sign denotes equivalence. Now we add a new element 5
0 = 1 = 2
3 = 4
5
and enforcing the equivalence 5=3, the data structure becomes
0 = 1 = 2
3 = 4 = 5
From this, one should be able to iterate efficiently through the equivalence set for any element. For 5, this set would be [3,4,5].
Boost already provides a convenient data structure called disjoint_sets that seems to meet most of my requirements. Consider this simple program that illustates how to implement the above example:
#include <cstdio>
#include <vector>
#include <boost/pending/disjoint_sets.hpp>
#include <boost/unordered/unordered_set.hpp>
/*
Equivalence relations
0 = 1 = 2
3 = 4
*/
int main(int , char* [])
{
typedef std::vector<int> VecInt;
typedef boost::unordered_set<int> SetInt;
VecInt rank (100);
VecInt parent (100);
boost::disjoint_sets<int*,int*> ds(&rank[0], &parent[0]);
SetInt elements;
for (int i=0; i<5; ++i) {
ds.make_set(i);
elements.insert(i);
}
ds.union_set(0,1);
ds.union_set(1,2);
ds.union_set(3,4);
printf("Number of sets:\n\t%d\n", (int)ds.count_sets(elements.begin(), elements.end()));
// normalize set so that parent is always the smallest number
ds.normalize_sets(elements.begin(), elements.end());
for (SetInt::const_iterator i = elements.begin(); i != elements.end(); ++i) {
printf("%d %d\n", *i, ds.find_set(*i));
}
return 0;
}
As seen above one can efficiently add elements, and dynamically expand the disjoint sets. How can one efficiently iterate over the elements of a single disjoint set, without having to iterate over all the elements?
Most probably you can't do that, disjoint_sets doesn't support iteration over one set only. The underlying data structure and algorithms wouldn't be able to do it efficiently anyway, i.e. even if there was support built in to disjoint_sets for iteration over one set only, that would be just as slow as iterating over all sets, and filtering out wrong sets.
Either I am missing something, you forgot to mention something, or maybe you were overthinking this ;)
Happily, equivalence is not equality. For A & B to be equivalent; they only need to share an attribute with the same value. this could be a scalar or even a vector. Anyway, I think your posted requirements can be achieved just using std::multiset and it's std::multiset::equal_range() member function.
//////////////////////////////////////
class E
{
//could be a GUID or something instead but the time complexity of
//std::multiset::equal_range with a simple int comparison should be logarithmic
static size_t _faucet;
public:
struct LessThan
{
bool operator()(const E* l, const E* r) const { return (l->eqValue() < r->eqValue()); }
};
using EL=std::vector<const E*>;
using ES=std::multiset<const E*, E::LessThan>;
using ER=std::pair<ES::iterator, ES::iterator>;
static size_t NewValue() { return ++_faucet; }
~E() { eqRemove(); }
E(size_t val) : _eqValue(val) {}
E(std::string name) : Name(name), _eqValue(NewValue()) { E::Elementals.insert(this); }
//not rly a great idea to use operator=() for this. demo only..
const E& operator=(const class E& other) { eqValue(other); return *this; }
//overriddable default equivalence interface
virtual size_t eqValue() const { return _eqValue; };
//clearly it matters how mutable you need your equivalence relationships to be,,
//in this implementation, if an element's equivalence relation changes then
//the element is going to be erased and re-inserted.
virtual void eqValue(const class E& other)
{
if (_eqValue == other._eqValue) return;
eqRemove();
_eqValue=other._eqValue;
E::Elementals.insert(this);
};
ES::iterator eqRemove()
{
auto range=E::Elementals.equal_range(this);
//worst-case complexity should be aprox linear over the range
for (auto it=range.first; it!=range.second; it++)
if (this == (*it))
return E::Elementals.erase(it);
return E::Elementals.end();
}
std::string Name; //some other attribute unique to the instance
static ES Elementals; //canonical set of elements with equivalence relations
protected:
size_t _eqValue=0;
};
size_t E::_faucet=0;
E::ES E::Elementals{};
//////////////////////////////////////
//random specialisation providing
//dynamic class-level equivalence
class StarFish : public E
{
public:
static void EqAssign(const class E& other)
{
if (StarFish::_id == other.eqValue()) return;
E el(StarFish::_id);
auto range=E::Elementals.equal_range(&el);
StarFish::_id=other.eqValue();
E::EL insertList(range.first, range.second);
E::Elementals.erase(range.first, range.second);
E::Elementals.insert(insertList.begin(), insertList.end());
}
StarFish() : E("starfish") {}
//base-class overrides
virtual size_t eqValue() const { return StarFish::_id; };
protected: //equivalence is a the class level
virtual void eqValue(const class E& other) { assert(0); }
private:
static size_t _id;
};
size_t StarFish::_id=E::NewValue();
//////////////////////////////////////
void eqPrint(const E& e)
{
std::cout << std::endl << "elementals equivalent to " << e.Name << ": ";
auto range=E::Elementals.equal_range(&e);
for (auto it=range.first; it!=range.second; it++)
std::cout << (*it)->Name << " ";
std::cout << std::endl << std::endl;
}
//////////////////////////////////////
void eqPrint()
{
for (auto it=E::Elementals.begin(); it!=E::Elementals.end(); it++)
std::cout << (*it)->Name << ": " << (*it)->eqValue() << " ";
std::cout << std::endl << std::endl;
}
//////////////////////////////////////
int main()
{
E e0{"zero"}, e1{"one"}, e2{"two"}, e3{"three"}, e4{"four"}, e5{"five"};
//per the OP
e0=e1=e2;
e3=e4;
e5=e3;
eqPrint(e0);
eqPrint(e3);
eqPrint(e5);
eqPrint();
StarFish::EqAssign(e3);
StarFish starfish1, starfish2;
starfish1.Name="fred";
eqPrint(e3);
//re-assignment
StarFish::EqAssign(e0);
e3=e0;
{ //out of scope removal
E e6{"six"};
e6=e4;
eqPrint(e4);
}
eqPrint(e5);
eqPrint(e0);
eqPrint();
return 0;
}
online demo
NB: C++ class inheritance also provides another kind of immutable equivalence that can be quite useful ;)
Related
I'm implementing an algorithm to return a vector string array with only the largest elements in the vector string array of entrance:
vector<string> solution(vector<string> inputArray) {
vector<string> s;
auto m = *max_element(inputArray.begin(),inputArray.end());
for(int i=0;i<inputArray.size();i++){
if(inputArray[i].size() == m.size())
{
s.push_back(inputArray[i]);
}
}
return s;
It works for every test case except in the case the entry string vector is {"enyky", "benyky","yely","varennyky"}. 'm' should return a pointer to "varennyky", but it returns a pointer to "yely" instead.
I digged in to the documentation for max_element, but cant find what I'm doing wrong. Can anybody help me?
Your function is comparing the strings lexicographically, which is the default comparison in case of strings.
To illustrate, consider the following example:
#include <algorithm>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
// Print a vector of strings
void print_vec(std::vector<std::string> vec)
{
for (const auto& el : vec) {
std::cout << el << " ";
}
std::cout << std::endl;
}
// Compares strings by length
bool less_length(const std::string& s1, const std::string& s2)
{
return s1.length() < s2.length();
}
int main()
{
std::vector<std::string> test_0 = {"enyky", "benyky","yely","varennyky"};
// Default sort and max element
std::sort(test_0.begin(), test_0.end());
print_vec(test_0);
const auto largest_0 = *std::max_element(test_0.begin(), test_0.end());
std::cout << "Largest member (lexicographically): " << largest_0 << '\n' << std::endl;
// Sort and max element by string size
std::sort(test_0.begin(), test_0.end(), less_length);
print_vec(test_0);
const auto largest_1 = *std::max_element(test_0.begin(), test_0.end(), less_length);
std::cout << "Largest member (by string length): " << largest_1 << std::endl;
}
The first part of the program runs what you are doing in your function: it finds the maximum element based on lexicographic ordering. According to that ordering, the largest string is yely, you can see that by the output from sort.
The second part uses a custom comparison function, borrowed directly from this book. It uses string length to determine the order in the max_element call and the result is what you were looking for. Again, the sorted vector is also printed for clarity.
I have a boost graph with multiples weights for each edges (imagine one set of weights per hour of the day). Every one of those weights values is stored in a propretyEdge class :
class propretyEdge {
std::map<std::string,double> weights; // Date indexed
}
I created a graph with those properties, and then filled it with the right values.
The problem is now that I want to launch the Dijkstra algorithm over a particular set of weight on the graph : for example a function that could be :
void Dijkstra (string date, parameters ... )
That would use the
weights[date]
value for each Edge of the graph.
I read over and over the documentation, and I couldn't have a clear picture of what I have to do. I surely need to write something like this, but I have no idea were to start :
boost::dijkstra_shortest_paths (
(*graph_m),
vertex_origin_num_l,
// weight_map (get (edge_weight, (*graph_m)))
// predecessor_map(boost::make_iterator_property_map(predecessors.begin(), get(boost::vertex_index, (*graph_m)))).
// distance_map(boost::make_iterator_property_map(distances.begin (), get(vertex_index,(*graph_m) )))
predecessor_map(predecessorMap).
distance_map(distanceMap)
);
Thank you for your help.
Edit
Thanks to the wonderful Answer of Sehe, I was able to do exactly what I wanted on MacOS and on Ubuntu.
But when we tried to compile this piece of code on Visual Studio 2012, it appeared that VS wasn't very good at understanding pointer function of boost. So we modified the part of Sehe :
auto dated_weight_f = [&](Graph::edge_descriptor ed) {
return g[ed].weights.at(date);
};
auto dated_weight_map = make_function_property_map<Graph::edge_descriptor, double>(dated_weight_f);
by :
class dated_weight_f {
public:
dated_weight_f(Graph* graph_p,std::string date_p){
graph_m=graph_p;
date_m=date_p;
}
typedef double result_type;
result_type operator()(Edge edge_p) const{
return (*graph_m)[edge_p].weights.at(date_m);
}
private:
Graph* graph_m;
std::string date_m;
};
const auto dated_weight_map = make_function_property_map<Edge>(dated_weight_f(graph_m,date_l));
Which had the advantage of not using a pointer function.
Since it's apparently not immediately clear that this question is answered in the other answer, I'll explain.
All you really need is a custom weight_map parameter that is "stateful" and can select a certain value for a given date.
You can make this as complicated as you wish ¹, so you could even interpolate/extrapolate a weight given an unknown date ², but let's for the purpose of this demonstration keep it simple.
Let's define the graph type (roughly) as above:
struct propretyEdge {
std::map<std::string, double> weights; // Date indexed
};
using Graph = adjacency_list<vecS, vecS, directedS, no_property, propretyEdge>;
Now, let's generate a random graph, with random weights for 3 different dates:
int main() {
Graph g;
std::mt19937 prng { std::random_device{}() };
generate_random_graph(g, 8, 12, prng);
uniform_real<double> weight_dist(10,42);
for (auto e : make_iterator_range(edges(g)))
for (auto&& date : { "2014-01-01", "2014-02-01", "2014-03-01" })
g[e].weights[date] = weight_dist(prng);
And, jumping to the goal:
for (std::string const& date : { "2014-01-01", "2014-02-01", "2014-03-01" }) {
Dijkstra(date, g, 0);
}
}
Now how do you implement Dijkstra(...)? Gleaning from the documentation sample, you'd do something like
void Dijkstra(std::string const& date, Graph const& g, int vertex_origin_num_l = 0) {
// magic postponed ...
std::vector<Graph::vertex_descriptor> p(num_vertices(g));
std::vector<double> d(num_vertices(g));
std::vector<default_color_type> color_map(num_vertices(g));
boost::typed_identity_property_map<Graph::vertex_descriptor> vid; // T* property maps were deprecated
dijkstra_shortest_paths(g, vertex_origin_num_l,
weight_map(dated_weight_map).
predecessor_map(make_iterator_property_map(p.data(), vid)).
distance_map(make_iterator_property_map(d.data(), vid)).
color_map(make_iterator_property_map(color_map.data(), vid))
);
Now the only unclear bit here should be dated_weight_map.
Enter Boost Property Maps
As I showed in the linked Is it possible to have several edge weight property maps for one graph BOOST?, you can have all kinds of property maps ³, including invocation of user-defined functions. This is the missing piece:
auto dated_weight_f = [&](Graph::edge_descriptor ed) {
return g[ed].weights.at(date);
};
auto dated_weight_map = make_function_property_map<Graph::edge_descriptor, double>(dated_weight_f);
Voilà: done
I hope that by now, the correspondence in the question as well as the answer of the linked question is clear. All that's left to do is post the full live sample and the outcome in a pretty picture:
Live On Coliru
#include <boost/property_map/property_map.hpp>
#include <boost/property_map/function_property_map.hpp>
#include <boost/property_map/property_map_iterator.hpp>
#include <random>
#include <boost/graph/random.hpp>
#include <boost/graph/adjacency_list.hpp>
#include <boost/graph/dijkstra_shortest_paths.hpp>
#include <fstream>
using namespace boost;
struct propretyEdge {
std::map<std::string, double> weights; // Date indexed
};
using Graph = adjacency_list<vecS, vecS, directedS, no_property, propretyEdge>;
void Dijkstra(std::string const& date, Graph const& g, int vertex_origin_num_l = 0) {
auto dated_weight_f = [&](Graph::edge_descriptor ed) {
return g[ed].weights.at(date);
};
auto dated_weight_map = make_function_property_map<Graph::edge_descriptor, double>(dated_weight_f);
std::vector<Graph::vertex_descriptor> p(num_vertices(g));
std::vector<double> d(num_vertices(g));
std::vector<default_color_type> color_map(num_vertices(g));
boost::typed_identity_property_map<Graph::vertex_descriptor> vid; // T* property maps were deprecated
dijkstra_shortest_paths(g, vertex_origin_num_l,
weight_map(dated_weight_map).
predecessor_map(make_iterator_property_map(p.data(), vid)).
distance_map(make_iterator_property_map(d.data(), vid)).
color_map(make_iterator_property_map(color_map.data(), vid))
);
std::cout << "distances and parents for '" + date + "':" << std::endl;
for (auto vd : make_iterator_range(vertices(g)))
{
std::cout << "distance(" << vd << ") = " << d[vd] << ", ";
std::cout << "parent(" << vd << ") = " << p[vd] << std::endl;
}
std::cout << std::endl;
std::ofstream dot_file("dijkstra-eg-" + date + ".dot");
dot_file << "digraph D {\n"
" rankdir=LR\n"
" size=\"6,4\"\n"
" ratio=\"fill\"\n"
" graph[label=\"shortest path on " + date + "\"];\n"
" edge[style=\"bold\"]\n"
" node[shape=\"circle\"]\n";
for (auto ed : make_iterator_range(edges(g))) {
auto u = source(ed, g),
v = target(ed, g);
dot_file
<< u << " -> " << v << "[label=\"" << get(dated_weight_map, ed) << "\""
<< (p[v] == u?", color=\"black\"" : ", color=\"grey\"")
<< "]";
}
dot_file << "}";
}
int main() {
Graph g;
std::mt19937 prng { std::random_device{}() };
generate_random_graph(g, 8, 12, prng);
uniform_real<double> weight_dist(10,42);
for (auto e : make_iterator_range(edges(g)))
for (auto&& date : { "2014-01-01", "2014-02-01", "2014-03-01" })
g[e].weights[date] = weight_dist(prng);
for (std::string const& date : { "2014-01-01", "2014-02-01", "2014-03-01" }) {
Dijkstra(date, g, 0);
}
}
Output, e.g.
¹ As long as you keep the invariants required by the algorithm you're invoking. In particular, you must return the same weight consistently during the execution, given the same edge. Also, some algorithms don't support negative weight etc.
² I'd highly suggest using a Boost ICL interval_map in such a case but I digress
³ see also map set/get requests into C++ class/structure changes
Is it possible to loop over sub range using range based for loop ?
std::vector <std::string> inputs={"1","abaaaa","abc","cda"};
for (auto &it : new_vector(inputs.begin()+1, inputs.end()))
{
// …
}
You could use Boost's iterator_range:
for (auto &it : boost::make_iterator_range(inputs.begin()+1, inputs.end()))
{
cout << it << endl;
}
demo
Alternatively you could write your own wrapper.
Unfortunately, there is no such thing in the C++ standard library. However, you can define your own wrapper like this (requires at least C++ 11 - which should not be problem in 2021):
template<typename Iter>
struct range
{
Iter b, e;
Iter begin() const { return b; }
Iter end() const { return e; }
};
template<typename T>
auto slice(const T& c, std::size_t from, std::size_t to = -1) -> range<decltype(c.begin())>
{
to = (to > c.size() ? c.size() : to);
return range<decltype(c.begin())>{c.begin() + from, c.begin() + to};
}
And then you can use it:
std::vector<int> items(100);
// Iterates from 4th to 49th item
for (auto x: slice(items, 4, 50))
{
}
// Iterates from 15th to the last item
for (auto x: slice(items, 15))
{
}
tl;dr
Long story short, you #include <range/v3/view/subrange.hpp> and change your new_vector to ranges::subrange. And that's it. Demo on Compiler Explorer.
So
Given the name you imagine for this function, new_vector, maybe you think you need the entity on the right of : to be a std::vector or at least some type of container.
If that's the case, then change your mind, it's not needed. All that : wants from its "right hand side" is that it have begin and end defined on them, member or non member. For instance, this compiles and runs just fine:
struct A {};
int* begin(A);
int* end(A);
struct B {
int* begin();
int* end();
};
int main()
{
for (auto it : A{}) {}
for (auto it : B{}) {}
}
I have K objects (K is small, e.g. 2 or 5) and I need to iterate over them N times in random order where N may be large. I need to iterate in a foreach loop and for this I should provide an iterator.
So far I created a std::vector of my K objects copied accordingly, so the size of vector is N and now I use begin() and end() provided by that vector. I use std::shuffle() to randomize the vector and this takes up to 20% of running time. I think it would be better (and more elegant, anyways) to write a custom iterator that returns one of my object in random order without creating the helping vector of size N. But how to do this?
It is obvious that your iterator must:
Store pointer to original vector or array: m_pSource
Store the count of requests (to be able to stop): m_nOutputCount
Use random number generator (see random): m_generator
Some iterator must be treated as end iterator: m_nOutputCount == 0
I've made an example for type int:
#include <iostream>
#include <random>
class RandomIterator: public std::iterator<std::forward_iterator_tag, int>
{
public:
//Creates "end" iterator
RandomIterator() : m_pSource(nullptr), m_nOutputCount(0), m_nCurValue(0) {}
//Creates random "start" iterator
RandomIterator(const std::vector<int> &source, int nOutputCount) :
m_pSource(&source), m_nOutputCount(nOutputCount + 1),
m_distribution(0, source.size() - 1)
{
operator++(); //make new random value
}
int operator* () const
{
return m_nCurValue;
}
RandomIterator operator++()
{
if (m_nOutputCount == 0)
return *this;
--m_nOutputCount;
static std::default_random_engine generator;
static bool bWasGeneratorInitialized = false;
if (!bWasGeneratorInitialized)
{
std::random_device rd; //expensive calls
generator.seed(rd());
bWasGeneratorInitialized = true;
}
m_nCurValue = m_pSource->at(m_distribution(generator));
return *this;
}
RandomIterator operator++(int)
{ //postincrement
RandomIterator tmp = *this;
++*this;
return tmp;
}
int operator== (const RandomIterator& other) const
{
if (other.m_nOutputCount == 0)
return m_nOutputCount == 0; //"end" iterator
return m_pSource == other.m_pSource;
}
int operator!= (const RandomIterator& other) const
{
return !(*this == other);
}
private:
const std::vector<int> *m_pSource;
int m_nOutputCount;
int m_nCurValue;
std::uniform_int_distribution<std::vector<int>::size_type> m_distribution;
};
int main()
{
std::vector<int> arrTest{ 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 };
std::cout << "Original =";
for (auto it = arrTest.cbegin(); it != arrTest.cend(); ++it)
std::cout << " " << *it;
std::cout << std::endl;
RandomIterator rndEnd;
std::cout << "Random =";
for (RandomIterator it(arrTest, 15); it != rndEnd; ++it)
std::cout << " " << *it;
std::cout << std::endl;
}
The output is:
Original = 1 2 3 4 5
Random = 1 4 1 3 2 4 5 4 2 3 4 3 1 3 4
You can easily convert it into a template. And make it to accept any random access iterator.
I just want to increment Dmitriy answer, because reading your question, it seems that you want that every time that you iterate your newly-created-and-shuffled collection the items should not repeat and Dmitryi´s answer does have repetition. So both iterators are useful.
template <typename T>
struct RandomIterator : public std::iterator<std::forward_iterator_tag, typename T::value_type>
{
RandomIterator() : Data(nullptr)
{
}
template <typename G>
RandomIterator(const T &source, G& g) : Data(&source)
{
Order = std::vector<int>(source.size());
std::iota(begin(Order), end(Order), 0);
std::shuffle(begin(Order), end(Order), g);
OrderIterator = begin(Order);
OrderIteratorEnd = end(Order);
}
const typename T::value_type& operator* () const noexcept
{
return (*Data)[*OrderIterator];
}
RandomIterator<T>& operator++() noexcept
{
++OrderIterator;
return *this;
}
int operator== (const RandomIterator<T>& other) const noexcept
{
if (Data == nullptr && other.Data == nullptr)
{
return 1;
}
else if ((OrderIterator == OrderIteratorEnd) && (other.Data == nullptr))
{
return 1;
}
return 0;
}
int operator!= (const RandomIterator<T>& other) const noexcept
{
return !(*this == other);
}
private:
const T *Data;
std::vector<int> Order;
std::vector<int>::iterator OrderIterator;
std::vector<int>::iterator OrderIteratorEnd;
};
template <typename T, typename G>
RandomIterator<T> random_begin(const T& v, G& g) noexcept
{
return RandomIterator<T>(v, g);
}
template <typename T>
RandomIterator<T> random_end(const T& v) noexcept
{
return RandomIterator<T>();
}
whole code at
http://coliru.stacked-crooked.com/a/df6ce482bbcbafcf or
https://github.com/xunilrj/sandbox/blob/master/sources/random_iterator/source/random_iterator.cpp
Implementing custom iterators can be very tricky so I tried to follow some tutorials, but please let me know if something have passed:
http://web.stanford.edu/class/cs107l/handouts/04-Custom-Iterators.pdf
https://codereview.stackexchange.com/questions/74609/custom-iterator-for-a-linked-list-class
Operator overloading
I think that the performance is satisfactory:
On the Coliru:
<size>:<time for 10 iterations>
1:0.000126582
10:3.5179e-05
100:0.000185914
1000:0.00160409
10000:0.0161338
100000:0.180089
1000000:2.28161
Off course it has the price to allocate a whole vector with the orders, that is the same size of the original vector.
An improvement would be to pre-allocate the Order vector if for some reason you have to random iterate very often and allow the iterator to use this pre-allocated vector, or some form of reset() in the iterator.
In some data structures, it would be useful to have members whose values are computed from the other data members upon access instead of stored.
For example, a typical rect class might store it's left, top, right and bottom coordinates in member data fields, and provide getter methods that return the computed width and height based on those values, for clients which require the relative dimensions instead of the absolute positions.
struct rect
{
int left, top, right, bottom;
// ...
int get_width() const { return right - left; }
int get_height() const { return bottom - top; }
};
This implementation allows us to get and set the absolute coordinates of the rectangles sides,
float center_y = (float)(box.top + box.bottom) / 2.0;
and additionally to get it's relative dimensions, albeit using the slightly different method-call operator expression syntax:
float aspect = (float)box.get_width() / (float)box.get_height();
The Problem
One could argue, however, that it is equally valid to store the relative width and height instead of absolute right and bottom coordinates, and require clients that need to compute the right and bottom values to use getter methods.
My Solution
In order to avoid the need to remember which case requires method call vs. data member access operator syntax, I have come up with some code that works in the current stable gcc and clang compilers. Here is a fully functional example implementation of a rect data structure:
#include <iostream>
struct rect
{
union {
struct {
union { int l; int left; };
union { int t; int top; };
union { int r; int right; };
union { int b; int bot; int bottom; };
};
struct {
operator int() {
return ((rect*)this)->r - ((rect*)this)->l;
}
} w, width;
struct {
operator int() {
return ((rect*)this)->b - ((rect*)this)->t;
}
} h, height;
};
rect(): l(0), t(0), r(0), b(0) {}
rect(int _w, int _h): l(0), t(0), r(_w), b(_h) {}
rect(int _l, int _t, int _r, int _b): l(_l), t(_t), r(_r), b(_b) {}
template<class OStream> friend OStream& operator<<(OStream& out, const rect& ref)
{
return out << "rect(left=" << ref.l << ", top=" << ref.t << ", right=" << ref.r << ", bottom=" << ref.b << ")";
}
};
/// #brief Small test program showing that rect.w and rect.h behave like data members
int main()
{
rect t(3, 5, 103, 30);
std::cout << "sizeof(rect) is " << sizeof(rect) << std::endl;
std::cout << "t is " << t << std::endl;
std::cout << "t.w is " << t.w << std::endl;
std::cout << "t.h is " << t.h << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Is there anything wrong with what I am doing here?
Something about the pointer-casts in the nested empty struct types' implicit conversion operators, i.e. these lines:
return ((rect*)this)->r - ((rect*)this)->l;
feels dirty, as though I may be violating good C++ style convention. If this or some other aspect of my solution is wrong, I'd like to know what the reasoning is, and ultimately, if this is bad practice then is there a valid way to achieve the same results.
One thing that I would normally expect to work doesn't:
auto w = t.w;
Also, one of the following lines works, the other does not:
t.l += 3;
t.w += 3; // compile error
Thus, you have not changed the fact that users need to know which members are data and which are functions.
I'd just make all of them functions. It is better encapsulation anyway. And I would prefer the full names, i.e. left, top, bottom, right, width and length. It might be a few more characters to write, but most code is read much more often than it is written. The extra few characters will pay off.