Search Results

Search found 1281 results on 52 pages for 'stl containers'.

Page 18/52 | < Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >

  • Multiple generic types in one container

    - by Lirik
    I was looking at the answer of this question regarding multiple generic types in one container and I can't really get it to work: the properties of the Metadata class are not visible, since the abstract class doesn't have them. Here is a slightly modified version of the code in the original question: public abstract class Metadata { } public class Metadata<T> : Metadata { // ... some other meta data public T Function{ get; set; } } List<Metadata> metadataObjects; metadataObjects.Add(new Metadata<Func<double,double>>()); metadataObjects.Add(new Metadata<Func<int,double>>()); metadataObjects.Add(new Metadata<Func<double,int>>()); foreach( Metadata md in metadataObjects) { var tmp = md.Function; // <-- Error: does not contain a definition for Function } The exact error is: error CS1061: 'Metadata' does not contain a definition for 'Function' and no extension method 'Function' accepting a first argument of type 'Metadata' could be found (are you missing a using directive or an assembly reference?) I believe it's because the abstract class does not define the property Function, thus the whole effort is completely useless. Is there a way that we can get the properties?

    Read the article

  • comparing two end() iterators

    - by aafoo
    list<int> foo; list<int> foo2; list<int>::iterator foo_end = foo.end(); list<int>::iterator foo2_end = foo2.end(); for (list<int>::iterator it = foo.begin(); it != foo2_end; ++foo) <- notice != comparison here { ... it this allowed? will it work correctly. I am inclined to think that this is implementation dependent, anyone knows if standard says anything about this?

    Read the article

  • Using an initializer_list on a map of vectors

    - by Hooked
    I've been trying to initialize a map of <ints, vector<ints> > using the new 0X standard, but I cannot seem to get the syntax correct. I'd like to make a map with a single entry with key:value = 1:<3,4 #include <initializer_list> #include <map> #include <vector> using namespace std; map<int, vector<int> > A = {1,{3,4}}; .... It dies with the following error using gcc 4.4.3: error: no matching function for call to std::map<int,std::vector<int,std::allocator<int> >,std::less<int>,std::allocator<std::pair<const int,std::vector<int,std::allocator<int> > > > >::map(<brace-enclosed initializer list>) Edit Following the suggestion by Cogwheel and adding the extra brace it now compiles with a warning that can be gotten rid of using the -fno-deduce-init-list flag. Is there any danger in doing so?

    Read the article

  • push(ing)_back objects pointers within a loop

    - by Jose Manuel Albornoz
    Consider the following: I have a class CDevices containing, amongst others, a string member class CDevice { public: CDevice(void); ~CDevice(void); // device name std::string Device_Name; etc... } and somewhere else in my code I define another class that contains a vector of pointers to CDevices class CDevice; class CServers { public: CServers(void); ~CServers(void); // Devices vector vector<CDevice*> Devices; etc... } The problem appears in the following lines in my main.c pDevice = new CDevice; pDevice->Device_Name = "de"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); pDevice->Device_Name = " revolotiunibus"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); pDevice->Device_Name = " orbium"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); pDevice->Device_Name = " coelestium"; Devices.push_back(pDevice); for(int i = 0; i < (int)Devices.size(); ++i) cout << "\nLoad name = " << Devices.at(i)->Device_Name << endl; The output I get is " coelestium" repeated four times: each time I push_back a new element into the vector all of the already existing elements take the value of the one which has just been added. I have also tried using iterators to recover each element in the vector with the same results. Could someone please tell me what's wrong here? Thankx

    Read the article

  • "Right" way to deallocate an std::vector object

    - by Jacob
    The first solution is: std::vector<int> *vec = new std::vector<int>; assert(vec != NULL); // ... delete vec; An alternative is: std::vector<int> v; //... vec.clear(); vec.swap(std::vector<int>(vec)); The second solution's a bit of a trick --- what's the "right" way to do it?

    Read the article

  • overloading "<<" with a struct (no class) cout style

    - by monkeyking
    I have a struct that I'd like to output using either 'std::cout' or some other output stream. Is this possible without using classes? Thanks #include <iostream> #include <fstream> template <typename T> struct point{ T x; T y; }; template <typename T> std::ostream& dump(std::ostream &o,point<T> p) const{ o<<"x: " << p.x <<"\ty: " << p.y <<std::endl; } template<typename T> std::ostream& operator << (std::ostream &o,const point<T> &a){ return dump(o,a); } int main(){ point<double> p; p.x=0.1; p.y=0.3; dump(std::cout,p); std::cout << p ;//how? return 0; } I tried different syntax' but I cant seem to make it work.

    Read the article

  • Sort a list of pointers.

    - by YuppieNetworking
    Hello all, Once again I find myself failing at some really simple task in C++. Sometimes I wish I could de-learn all I know from OO in java, since my problems usually start by thinking like Java. Anyways, I have a std::list<BaseObject*> that I want to sort. Let's say that BaseObject is: class BaseObject { protected: int id; public: BaseObject(int i) : id(i) {}; virtual ~BaseObject() {}; }; I can sort the list of pointer to BaseObject with a comparator struct: struct Comparator { bool operator()(const BaseObject* o1, const BaseObject* o2) const { return o1->id < o2->id; } }; And it would look like this: std::list<BaseObject*> mylist; mylist.push_back(new BaseObject(1)); mylist.push_back(new BaseObject(2)); // ... mylist.sort(Comparator()); // intentionally omitted deletes and exception handling Until here, everything is a-ok. However, I introduced some derived classes: class Child : public BaseObject { protected: int var; public: Child(int id1, int n) : BaseObject(id1), var(n) {}; virtual ~Child() {}; }; class GrandChild : public Child { public: GrandChild(int id1, int n) : Child(id1,n) {}; virtual ~GrandChild() {}; }; So now I would like to sort following the following rules: For any Child object c and BaseObject b, b<c To compare BaseObject objects, use its ids, as before. To compare Child objects, compare its vars. If they are equal, fallback to rule 2. GrandChild objects should fallback to the Child behavior (rule 3). I initially thought that I could probably do some casts in Comparator. However, this casts away constness. Then I thought that probably I could compare typeids, but then everything looked messy and it is not even correct. How could I implement this sort, still using list<BaseObject*>::sort ? Thank you

    Read the article

  • Making uppercase of std::string

    - by Daniel K.
    Which implementation do you think is better? std::string ToUpper( const std::string& source ) { std::string result; result.reserve( source.length() ); std::transform( source.begin(), source.end(), result.begin(), std::ptr_fun<int, int>( std::toupper ) ); return result; } and... std::string ToUpper( const std::string& source ) { std::string result( source.length(), '\0' ); std::transform( source.begin(), source.end(), result.begin(), std::ptr_fun<int, int>( std::toupper ) ); return result; } Difference is that the first one uses reserve method after the default constructor, but the second one uses the constructor accepting the number of characters.

    Read the article

  • C++'s unordered_map / hash_map / Google's dense_hash - how to input binary data (buf+len) and insert

    - by shlomif
    Hi all, I have two questions about Google's dense_hash_map, which can be used instead of the more standard unordered_map or hash_map: How do I use an arbitrary binary data memory segment as a key: I want a buffer+length pair, which may still contain some NUL (\0) characters. I can see how I use a NUL-terminated char * string , but that's not what I want. How do I implement an operation where I look if a key exists, and if not - insert it and if it does return the pointer to the existing key and let me know what actually happened. I'd appreciate it if anyone can shed any light on this subject. Regards, -- Shlomi Fish

    Read the article

  • C++ design question, container of instances and pointers

    - by Tom
    Hi all, Im wondering something. I have class Polygon, which composes a vector of Line (another class here) class Polygon { std::vector<Line> lines; public: const_iterator begin() const; const_iterator end() const; } On the other hand, I have a function, that calculates a vector of pointers to lines, and based on those lines, should return a pointer to a Polygon. Polygon* foo(Polygon& p){ std::vector<Line> lines = bar (p.begin(),p.end()); return new Polygon(lines); } Here's the question: I can always add a Polygon (vector Is there a better way that dereferencing each element of the vector and assigning it to the existing vector container? //for line in vector<Line*> v //vcopy is an instance of vector<Line> vcopy.push_back(*(v.at(i)) I think not, but I dont really like that approach. Hopefully, I will be able to convince the author of the class to change it, but I cant base my coding right now to that fact (and i'm scared of a performance hit). Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • C++ design question, container of instances and pointers

    - by Tom
    Hi all, Im wondering something. I have class Polygon, which composes a vector of Line (another class here) class Polygon { std::vector<Line> lines; public: const_iterator begin() const; const_iterator end() const; } On the other hand, I have a function, that calculates a vector of pointers to lines, and based on those lines, should return a pointer to a Polygon. Polygon* foo(Polygon& p){ std::vector<Line> lines = bar (p.begin(),p.end()); return new Polygon(lines); } Here's the question: I can always add a Polygon (vector Is there a better way that dereferencing each element of the vector and assigning it to the existing vector container? //for line in vector<Line*> v //vcopy is an instance of vector<Line> vcopy.push_back(*(v.at(i)) I think not, but I dont really like that approach. Hopefully, I will be able to convince the author of the class to change it, but I cant base my coding right now to that fact (and i'm scared of a performance hit). Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • C++ map to track when the end of map is reached

    - by eNetik
    Currently I have a map that prints out the following map<string, map<int,int> > mapper; map<int,int>::iterator inner; map<string, map<int,int> >::iterator outer; for(outer = mapper.begin(); outer != mapper.end(); outer++){ cout<<outer->first<<": "; for(inner = outer->second.begin(); inner != outer->second.end(); inner++){ cout<<inner->first<<","<<inner->second<<","; } } As of now this prints out the following stringone: 1,2,3,4,6,7,8, stringtwo: 3,5,6,7, stringthree: 2,3,4,5, What i want it to print out is stringone: 1,2,3,4,6,7,8 stringtwo: 3,5,6,7 stringthree: 2,3,4,5 how can i check for the end of the map inside my inner map? Any help would be appreciated Thank you

    Read the article

  • Does std::multiset guarantee insertion order?

    - by Naveen
    I have a std::multiset which stores elements of class A. I have provided my own implementation of operator< for this class. My question is if I insert two equivalent objects into this multiset is their order guaranteed? For example, first I insert a object a1 into the set and then I insert an equivalent object a2 into this set. Can I expect the a1 to come before a2 when I iterate through the set? If no, is there any way to achieve this using multiset?

    Read the article

  • std::set<T>::erase(key). What if key isn't there?

    - by Armen Tsirunyan
    if I erase an element from an std::set and pass the key, not the iterator, and the key isn't in the set right now, will an exception be thrown? The thing is every second sentence in the MSDN documentation says: "this does blah blah, but it doesn't conform to the standard". So I need to know the standard behaviour. I just couldn't find it in the standard. Redirecting to the relevant clause will do as well. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Virtual methods as Comp function to sort

    - by wilsongoncalo.mp
    Hello everyone! I'm new to C++ and i'm trying to use std::sort function to sort a vector of Solutions. The code is something like this (solution list is a *vector): void SolutionSet::sort(Comparator &comparator) { std::sort(solutionsList_->begin(), solutionsList_->end(), &comparator::compare); } The comparator param is a Comparator´s child class instance , and the compare method is virtual at Comparator class and implemented by all Comparator's child classes. And i want to use that function as a comparator function at std:sort(). Is this possible? If it is, can someone tell me how? Because with the previous code, it doesn't work. If i've not made myself clear, please just ask! Thank you guys!

    Read the article

  • Why are there two implementations of std::sort (with and without a comparator) rather than one implementation with a default template parameter?

    - by PolyVox
    In my code I'm adopting a design strategy which is similar to some standard library algorithms in that the exact behavior can be customized by a function object. The simplest example is std::sort, where a function object can control how the comparison is made between objects. I notice that the Visual C++ provides two implementations of std::sort, which naturally involves code duplication. I would have imagined that it was instead possible to have only one implementation, and provide a default comparator (using operator< ) as a default template parameter. What is the rational behind two separate versions? Would my suggestion make the interface more complex in some way? Or result in confusing error messages when the object does not provide operator Thanks, David

    Read the article

  • std::map keys in C++

    - by Soumava
    I have a requirement to create two different maps in C++. The Key is of type CHAR * and the Value is a pointer to a struct. I am filling 2 maps with these pairs, in separate iterations. After creating both maps I need find all such instances in which the value of the string referenced by the CHAR * are same. For this i am using the following code : typedef struct _STRUCTTYPE { .. } STRUCTTYPE, *PSTRUCTTYPE; typedef pair {CHAR *,PSTRUCTTYPE} kvpair; .. CHAR *xyz; PSTRUCTTYPE abc; after filling the information; Map.insert (kvpair(xyz,abc)); the above is repeated x times for the first map, and y times for the second map. after both are filled out; std::map {CHAR *, PSTRUCTTYPE} :: iterator Iter,findIter; for (Iter=iteratedMap-begin();Iter!=iteratedMap-end();mapIterator++) { char *key = Iter-first; printf("%s\n",key); findIter=otherMap-find(key); //printf("%u",findIter-second); if (findIter!=otherMap-end()) { printf("Match!\n"); } } The above code does not show any match, although the list of keys in both maps show obvious matches. My understanding is that the equals operator for CHAR * just equates the memory address of the pointers. My question is, what should i do to alter the equals operator for this type of key or could I use a different datatype for the string? *note : {} has been used instead of angle brackets as the content inside angle brackets was not showing up in the post.

    Read the article

  • How to convert c++ std::list element to multimap iterator

    - by user63898
    Hello all, I have std::list<multimap<std::string,std::string>::iterator> > Now i have new element: multimap<std::string,std::string>::value_type aNewMmapValue("foo1","test") I want to avoid the need to set temp multimap and do insert to the new element just to get its iterator back so i could to push it back to the: std::list<multimap<std::string,std::string>::iterator> > can i somehow avoid this creation of the temp multimap. Thanks

    Read the article

  • What's the bug in the following code ?

    - by Johannes
    #include <iostream> #include <algorithm> #include <vector> #include <boost/array.hpp> #include <boost/bind.hpp> int main() { boost::array<int, 4> a = {45, 11, 67, 23}; std::vector<int> v(a.begin(), a.end()); std::vector<int> v2; std::transform(v.begin(), v.end(), v2.begin(), boost::bind(std::multiplies<int>(), _1, 2)); std::copy(v2.begin(), v2.end(), std::ostream_iterator<int>(std::cout, " ")); } When run, this gives a creepy segmentation fault. Please tell me where I'm going wrong.

    Read the article

  • Random Movement in a Fixed Container

    - by James Barracca
    I'm looking to create something that can move randomly inside of a fixed div container. I love the way the object moves in this example that I found searching this website... http://jsfiddle.net/Xw29r/15/ The code on the jsfiddle contains the following: $(document).ready(function(){ animateDiv(); }); function makeNewPosition(){ // Get viewport dimensions (remove the dimension of the div) var h = $(window).height() - 50; var w = $(window).width() - 50; var nh = Math.floor(Math.random() * h); var nw = Math.floor(Math.random() * w); return [nh,nw]; } function animateDiv(){ var newq = makeNewPosition(); var oldq = $('.a').offset(); var speed = calcSpeed([oldq.top, oldq.left], newq); $('.a').animate({ top: newq[0], left: newq[1] }, speed, function(){ animateDiv(); }); }; function calcSpeed(prev, next) { var x = Math.abs(prev[1] - next[1]); var y = Math.abs(prev[0] - next[0]); var greatest = x > y ? x : y; var speedModifier = 0.1; var speed = Math.ceil(greatest/speedModifier); return speed; }? CSS: div.a { width: 50px; height:50px; background-color:red; position:fixed; }? However, I don't believe the code above constricts that object at all. I need my object to move randomly inside of a container that is let's say for now... 1200px in width and 500px in height. Can someone steer me in the right direction? I'm super new to coding so I'm having a hard time finding an answer on my own. Thanks so much! James

    Read the article

  • Is it safe to take the address of std::wstring's internal pointer?

    - by LCC
    I have an interface which is used like the following: if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetSize(&size)) { wchar_t tmp = new wchar_t[size]; if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetValue(tmp, size))) { std::wstring str = tmp; // do some work which doesn't throw } delete[] tmp; } Is it safe and portable to do this instead? if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetSize(&size)) { std::wstring str; str.resize(size); if (SUCCEEDED(pInterface->GetValue(&str[0], size))) { // do some work } } Now, obviously this works (doesn't crash/corrupt memory) or I wouldn't have asked, but I'm mostly wanting to know if there's a compelling reason not to do this.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25  | Next Page >