Search Results

Search found 5128 results on 206 pages for 'member hiding'.

Page 183/206 | < Previous Page | 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190  | Next Page >

  • sending address of a variable declared on the stack?

    - by kobac
    I have a doubt concerning declaring variables, their scope, and if their address could be sent to other functions even if they are declared on the stack? class A{ AA a; void f1(){ B b; aa.f2(&b); } }; class AA{ B* mb; f2(B* b){ mb = b; //... } }; Afterwards, I use my AA::mb pointer in the code. So things I would like to know are following. When the program exits A::f1() function, b variable since declared as a local variable and placed on the stack, can't be used anymore afterwards. What happens with the validity of the AA::mb pointer? It contains the address of the local variable which could not be available anymore, so the pointer isn't valid anymore? If B class is a std::<vector>, and AA::mb is not a pointer anymore to that vector, but a vector collection itself for example. I would like to avoid copying all of it's contents in AA::f2() to a member AA::mb in line mb = b. Which solution would you recommend since I can't assign a pointer to it, because it'll be destroyed when the program exits AA::f2()

    Read the article

  • Overhead of calling tiny functions from a tight inner loop? [C++]

    - by John
    Say you see a loop like this one: for(int i=0; i<thing.getParent().getObjectModel().getElements(SOME_TYPE).count(); ++i) { thing.getData().insert( thing.GetData().Count(), thing.getParent().getObjectModel().getElements(SOME_TYPE)[i].getName() ); } if this was Java I'd probably not think twice. But in performance-critical sections of C++, it makes me want to tinker with it... however I don't know if the compiler is smart enough to make it futile. This is a made up example but all it's doing is inserting strings into a container. Please don't assume any of these are STL types, think in general terms about the following: Is having a messy condition in the for loop going to get evaluated each time, or only once? If those get methods are simply returning references to member variables on the objects, will they be inlined away? Would you expect custom [] operators to get optimized at all? In other words is it worth the time (in performance only, not readability) to convert it to something like: ElementContainer &source = thing.getParent().getObjectModel().getElements(SOME_TYPE); int num = source.count(); Store &destination = thing.getData(); for(int i=0;i<num;++i) { destination.insert(thing.GetData().Count(), source[i].getName(); } Remember, this is a tight loop, called millions of times a second. What I wonder is if all this will shave a couple of cycles per loop or something more substantial? Yes I know the quote about "premature optimisation". And I know that profiling is important. But this is a more general question about modern compilers, Visual Studio in particular.

    Read the article

  • Generic factory of generic containers

    - by Feuermurmel
    I have a generic abstract class Factory<T> with a method createBoxedInstance() which returns instances of T created by implementations of createInstance() wrapped in the generic container Box<T>. abstract class Factory<T> { abstract T createInstance(); public final Box<T> createBoxedInstance() { return new Box<T>(createInstance()); } public final class Box<T> { public final T content; public Box(T content) { this.content = content; } } } At some points I need a container of type Box<S> where S is an ancestor of T. Is it possible to make createBoxedInstance() itself generic so that it will return instances of Box<S> where S is chosen by the caller? Sadly, defining the function as follows does not work as a type parameter cannot be declared using the super keyword, only used. public final <S super T> Box<S> createBoxedInstance() { return new Box<S>(createInstance()); } The only alternative I see, is to make all places that need an instance of Box<S> accept Box<? extends S> which makes the container's content member assignable to S. Is there some way around this without re-boxing the instances of T into containers of type Box<S>? (I know I could just cast the Box<T> to a Box<S> but I would feel very, very guilty.)

    Read the article

  • Automatically Persisting a Complex Java Object

    - by VeeArr
    For a project I am working on, I need to persist a number of POJOs to a database. The POJOs class definitions are sometimes highly nested, but they should flatten okay, as the nesting is tree-like and contains no cycles (and the base elements are eventually primitives/Strings). It is preferred that the solution used create one table per data type and that the tables will have one field per primitive member in the POJO. Subclassing and similar problems are not issues for this particular project. Does anybody know of any existing solutions that can: Automatically generate a CREATE TABLE definition from the class definition Automatically generate a query to persist an object to the database, given an instance of the object Automatically generate a query to retrieve an object from the database and return it as a POJO, given a key. Solutions that can do this with minimum modifications/annotions to the class files and minimum external configuration are preferred. Example: Java classes //Class to be persisted class TypeA { String guid; long timestamp; TypeB data1; TypeC data2; } class TypeB { int id; int someData; } class TypeC { int id; int otherData; } Could map to CREATE TABLE TypeA ( guid CHAR(255), timestamp BIGINT, data1_id INT, data1_someData INT, data2_id INt, data2_otherData INT ); Or something similar.

    Read the article

  • LinQ optimization

    - by Budda
    Here is a peace of code: void MyFunc(List<MyObj> objects) { MyFunc1(objects); foreach( MyObj obj in objects.Where(obj1=>obj1.Good)) { // Do Action With Good Object } } void MyFunc1(List<MyObj> objects) { int iGoodCount = objects.Where(obj1=>obj1.Good).Count(); BeHappy(iGoodCount); // do other stuff with 'objects' collection } Here we see that collection is analyzed twice and each time the value of 'Good' property is checked for each member: 1st time when calculating count of good objects, 2nd - when iterating through all good objects. It is desirable to have that optimized, and here is a straightforward solution: before call to MyFunc1 makecreate an additional temporary collection of good objects only (goodObjects, it can be IEnumerable); get count of these objects and pass it as an additional parameter to MyFunc1; in the 'MyFunc' method iterate not through 'objects.Where(...)' but through the 'goodObjects' collection. Not too bad approach (as far as I see), but additional parameter is required to be passed. Question: is there any LinQ out-of-the-box functionality that allows any caching during 1st Where().Count(), remembering a processed collection and use it in the next iteration? Any thoughts are welcome. Thanks.

    Read the article

  • Trying to overload + operator

    - by FrostyStraw
    I cannot for the life of me understand why this is not working. I am so confused. I have a class Person which has a data member age, and I just want to add two people so that it adds the ages. I don't know why this is so hard, but I'm looking for examples and I feel like everyone does something different, and for some reason NONE of them work. Sometimes the examples I see have two parameters, sometimes they only have one, sometimes the parameters are references to the object, sometimes they're not, sometimes they return an int, sometimes they return a Person object. Like..what is the most normal way to do it? class Person { public: int age; //std::string haircolor = "brown"; //std::string ID = "23432598"; Person(): age(19) {} Person operator+(Person&) { } }; Person operator+(Person &obj1, Person &obj2){ Person sum = obj1; sum += obj2; return sum; } I really feel like overloading a + operator should seriously be the easiest thing in the world except I DON'T KNOW WHAT I AM DOING. I don't know if I'm supposed to create the overload function inside the class, outside, if it makes a difference, why if I do it inside it only allows one parameter, I just honestly don't get it.

    Read the article

  • iPhone: How to run a Beta build, in addition to the App Store build?

    - by rondoagogo
    Hi, All! I have an app on the Store for which we’re readying an update. The other members of our team have the App Store version already loaded up (~purchased) on their respective iPhones -- and those contain User Data which each member needs to be able to keep. In the meantime, we need to test out a Beta version of the next version of the app. Presumably, we’d need to have the two versions (ad hoc, and app store) co-existing on each device, at least until everyone’s signed off on the beta, and it’s uploaded to the store (at which point, they'd delete the beta version). [Once it’s on the Store, of course, they can each update their main (i.e., Release) version of the app via the usual App Store 'update' mechanism -- and then delete the beta version from their devices. In that case, all their user data is still retained intact.] So assuming that’s the proper workflow ... How do I issue a Beta to the team, and have it not replace/overwrite the existing App Store version? I’ve tried customizing parameters in the beta’s “[appname]-Info.plist”, but haven’t found a setting yet that allows the two versions (beta and release) to co-exist on the same device. Any ideas? And is this this is the proper approach to them being able to keep their data? (And last, how might I do it with & without a script? I assume there's just one parameter that'd need to be changed.) I hope this all makes sense -- thank you in advance for your help!

    Read the article

  • Add a smaller subView with new origin

    - by ReachWest
    I can't get my head around this - I know it must be simple.. I'm starting to feel pretty stupid. I have two viewControllers. MainViewController.h/m and LevelsViewController.h/m I want to add a subView from the LevelsViewController class and a view that is built in IB called levelsView. I am calling this from the MainViewController.m file. The levelsView is only 200x200 pixels and I want to offset it from the frame origin of the superView by x=140 pixels and y=50 pixels. I have this working - the view displays, but I can't figure out how to offset it. It only shows up at the 0,0 superView frame origin. (The superView shows below it, which is what I want). Here is the code I call in the method in the MainViewController.m that displays the levelsView.(I have commented out some of the things I have tried - but throws this error: error: request for member 'frame' in 'myLevelsView', which is of non-class type 'LevelsViewController*' ) - (void) displayLevelsPage { if (self.theLevelsView == nil) // Does not yet exist - therefore create { LevelsViewController * myLevelsView = [[LevelsViewController alloc] initWithNibName:@"levelsView" bundle:[NSBundle mainBundle]]; NSLog(@"NEW theLevelsView instance created!"); CGRect frame2 = CGRectMake(140, 50, 200, 200); //myLevelsView.frame = frame2; self.theLevelsView = myLevelsView; [myLevelsView release]; } [self.view addSubview: theLevelsView.view]; NSLog(@"Levels View has been activated"); } Any insight would be appreciated.

    Read the article

  • LNK4221 and LNK4006 Warnings!

    - by user295030
    Hi, I basically making a static library of my own. I have taken my code which works and now put it into a static library for another program to use. In my library I am using another static library which I don't want the people who will be using my API to know. Since, I want to hide that information from them I can't tell them to install the other static library. Anyway, I used the command line Lib.exe to extract and create a smaller lib file of just the obj's I used. However, I get a bunch of "LNK4006 :second definition ignored" linker warnings for each obj I use followed by "LNK4221 no public symbols found;archive member will be inaccessible". I am doing this work in vs2008 and I am not sure what I am doing wrong. I am using the #pragma comment line in my .cpp file I have also modified the librarian to add my smaller .lib along with its location. my code simply makes calls to a couple functions which it should be able to get from those Obj file in the smaller lib. All my functions are implemented in .cpp file and my header just have the includes of the third party header files and come standard c++ header files. nothing fancy. I have actually no function definitions in there atm. I was going to put the API definition in there and implement that in the .cpp for this static lib that i was going to make. However, I just wanted to build my code before I added more to it. s Any help would be appreciated. is this a vs2008 configuration issue? or a program issue I am not sure. thanks for the help!

    Read the article

  • Should we use p(..) or (*p)(..) when p is a function pointer?

    - by q0987
    Reference: [33.11] Can I convert a pointer-to-function to a void*? #include "stdafx.h" #include <iostream> int f(char x, int y) { return x; } int g(char x, int y) { return y; } typedef int(*FunctPtr)(char,int); int callit(FunctPtr p, char x, int y) // original { return p(x, y); } int callitB(FunctPtr p, char x, int y) // updated { return (*p)(x, y); } int _tmain(int argc, _TCHAR* argv[]) { FunctPtr p = g; // original std::cout << p('c', 'a') << std::endl; FunctPtr pB = &g; // updated std::cout << (*pB)('c', 'a') << std::endl; return 0; } Question Which way, the original or updated, is the recommended method? Thank you Although I do see the following usage in the original post: void baz() { FredMemFn p = &Fred::f; ? declare a member-function pointer ... }

    Read the article

  • Qt - 2 QMainWindow glued - Size of Layout

    - by user1773603
    I have a main window that I center this way in main.cpp : int main(int argc, char *argv[]) { QApplication app(argc, argv); QMainWindow *qmain = new QMainWindow; Ui_MainWindow ui; ui.setupUi(qmain); QRect r = qmain->geometry(); r.moveCenter(QApplication::desktop()->availableGeometry().center()); qmain->setGeometry(r); qmain->show(); return app.exec(); } In this "qmain" main window, I can create another QMainWindow and I try to make stick (or glue I don't know how to say) the two windows. Actually, I would like the right-top corner of the first one to be located at the left-top of the second one. For this, I use the following Ui_MainWindow's member function : void Ui_MainWindow::generate_IC() { qmenu = new QMainWindow; DiskMenu = new Ui_DiskGalMenu; DiskMenu->setupUi(qmenu); setInitialDiskMenuPosition(qmenu, this); qmenu->show(); } and the setInitialDiskMenuPosition : void Ui_MainWindow::setInitialDiskMenuPosition(QMainWindow *MainWindow, Ui_MainWindow *parent) { QSize size = parent->widget->size(); QDesktopWidget* desktop = QApplication::desktop(); int width = desktop->width(); int height = desktop->height(); int mw = size.width(); int mh = size.height(); int right = (width/2) + (mw/2); int top = (height/2) - (mh/2); MainWindow->move(right, top); } But the problem is that I don't get exactly what I want since the centralwidget size "parent- widget-size()" only returns the size of the widget and not the whole "qmain" parent window. So I have a light shift because the borders of the "qmain" window are not taken in account like it is shown below : If I could have access to the size of the whole parent window... If anyone could help me

    Read the article

  • What is a truly empty std::vector in C++?

    - by RyanG
    I've got a two vectors in class A that contain other class objects B and C. I know exactly how many elements these vectors are supposed to hold at maximum. In the initializer list of class A's constructor, I initialize these vectors to their max sizes (constants). If I understand this correctly, I now have a vector of objects of class B that have been initialized using their default constructor. Right? When I wrote this code, I thought this was the only way to deal with things. However, I've since learned about std::vector.reserve() and I'd like to achieve something different. I'd like to allocate memory for these vectors to grow as large as possible because adding to them is controlled by user-input, so I don't want frequent resizings. However, I iterate through this vector many, many times per second and I only currently work on objects I've flagged as "active". To have to check a boolean member of class B/C on ever iteration is silly. I don't want these objects to even BE there for my iterators to see when I run through this list. Is reserving the max space ahead of time and using push_back to add a new object to the vector a solution to this?

    Read the article

  • What is causing this template-related compile error? (c++)

    - by Setien
    When I try to compile this: #include <map> #include <string> template <class T> class ZUniquePool { typedef std::map< int, T* > ZObjectMap; ZObjectMap m_objects; public: T * Get( int id ) { ZObjectMap::const_iterator it = m_objects.find( id ); if( it == m_objects.end() ) { T * p = new T; m_objects[ id ] = p; return p; } return m_objects[ id ]; } }; int main( int argc, char * args ) { ZUniquePool< std::string > pool; return 0; } I get this: main.cpp: In member function ‘T* ZUniquePool<T>::Get(int)’: main.cpp:12: error: expected `;' before ‘it’ main.cpp:13: error: ‘it’ was not declared in this scope I'm using GCC 4.2.1 on Mac OS X. It works in VS2008. I'm wondering whether it might be a variation of this problem: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1364837/why-doesnt-this-c-template-code-compile But as my error output is only partially similar, and my code works in VS2008, I am not sure. Can anyone shed some light on what I am doing wrong?

    Read the article

  • boost::function & boost::lambda - call site invocation & accessing _1 and _2 as the type

    - by John Dibling
    Sorry for the confusing title. Let me explain via code: #include <string> #include <boost\function.hpp> #include <boost\lambda\lambda.hpp> #include <iostream> int main() { using namespace boost::lambda; boost::function<std::string(std::string, std::string)> f = _1.append(_2); std::string s = f("Hello", "There"); std::cout << s; return 0; } I'm trying to use function to create a function that uses the labda expressions to create a new return value, and invoke that function at the call site, s = f("Hello", "There"); When I compile this, I get: 1>------ Build started: Project: hacks, Configuration: Debug x64 ------ 1>Compiling... 1>main.cpp 1>.\main.cpp(11) : error C2039: 'append' : is not a member of 'boost::lambda::lambda_functor<T>' 1> with 1> [ 1> T=boost::lambda::placeholder<1> 1> ] Using MSVC 9. My fundamental understanding of function and lambdas may be lacking. The tutorials and docs did not help so far this morning. How do I do what I'm trying to do?

    Read the article

  • Debugging a local SQL Server 2008 stored proceedure from Visual studio 2008

    - by Ricibob
    Hi all, There are a few posts about this question around but most concern remote debugging - here everything is on same machine. Visual studio 2008. I have a data connection to localhost SQL Server 2008 using Windows authentication with an admin account - this account is a member of sysadmin in SQL server. I double click stored proc and add a break point. I right click and select "Step into stored proceedure". I get the loathed and feared "Canceled by user." in output window. Does anyone know whats doing? Further - right clicking on the data connection shows both "Application debugging" and "Allow SQL/CLR Debugging". I have checked "Enable SQL Server debugging" on the properties of the C# client app. If run that in debug and try to step in to stored proc code "command.ExecuteNonQuery()" then the break points in the stored proc become disabled and are not pulled. After doing this once the right click on stored proc "Execute" and "Step into stored proceedure" are greyed/disabled. To get them back I have to restart visual studio (refresh connection doesn't do it). Any help much appreciated!! Cheers.

    Read the article

  • Suggestions on Working with this Inherited Generic Method

    - by blu
    We have inherited a project that is a wrapper around a section of the core business model. There is one method that takes a generic, finds items matching that type from a member and then returns a list of that type. public List<T> GetFoos<T>() { List<IFoo> matches = Foos.FindAll( f => f.GetType() == typeof(T) ); List<T> resultList = new List<T>(); foreach (var match in matches) { resultList.Add((T)obj); } } Foos can hold the same object cast into various classes in inheritance hierarchy to aggregate totals differently for different UI presentations. There are 20+ different types of descendants that can be returned by GetFoos. The existing code basically has a big switch statement copied and pasted throughout the code. The code in each section calls GetFoos with its corresponding type. We are currently refactoring that into one consolidated area, but as we are doing that we are looking at other ways to work with this method. One thought was to use reflection to pass in the type, and that worked great until we realized the Invoke returned an object, and that it needed to be cast somehow to the List <T>. Another was to just use the switch statement until 4.0 and then use the dynamic language options. We welcome any alternate thoughts on how we can work with this method. I have left the code pretty brief, but if you'd like to know any additional details please just ask.

    Read the article

  • When are temporaries created as part of a function call destroyed?

    - by Michael Mrozek
    Is a temporary created as part of an argument to a function call guaranteed to stay around until the called function ends, even if the temporary isn't passed directly to the function? There's virtually no chance that was coherent, so here's an example: class A { public: A(int x) : x(x) {printf("Constructed A(%d)\n", x);} ~A() {printf("Destroyed A\n");} int x; int* y() {return &x;} }; void foo(int* bar) { printf("foo(): %d\n", *bar); } int main(int argc, char** argv) { foo(A(4).y()); } If A(4) were passed directly to foo it would definitely not be destroyed until after the foo call ended, but instead I'm calling a method on the temporary and losing any reference to it. I would instinctively think the temporary A would be destroyed before foo even starts, but testing with GCC 4.3.4 shows it isn't; the output is: Constructed A(4) foo(): 4 Destroyed A The question is, is GCC's behavior guaranteed by the spec? Or is a compiler allowed to destroy the temporary A before the call to foo, invaliding the pointer to its member I'm using?

    Read the article

  • Looking for something to add some standard rules for my c++ project.

    - by rkb
    Hello all, My team is developing a C++ project on linux. We use vim as editor. I want to enforce some code standard rules in our team in such a way that if the code is not in accordance with it, some sort of warning or error will be thrown when it builds or compiles. Not necessarily it builds but at least I can run some plugin or tools on that code to make sure it meets the standard. So that before committing to svn everyone need to run the code through some sort of plugin or script and make sure it meets the requirement and then only he/she can commit. Not sure if we can add some rules to vim, if there are any let me know about it. For eg. In our code standards all the member variables and private functions should start with _ class A{ private: int _count; float _amount; void _increment_count(){ ++_count; } } So I want to throw some warning or error or some sort of messages for this class if the variables are declared as follows. class A{ private: int count; float amount; void increment_count(){ ++_count; } } Please note that warning and error are not from compiler becoz program is still valid. Its from the tool I want to use so that code goes to re-factoring but still works fine on the executable side. I am looking for some sort of plugin or pre parsers or scripts which will help me in achieving all this. Currently we use svn; just to anser the comment.

    Read the article

  • const object in c++

    - by Codenotguru
    I have a question on constant objects. In the following program: class const_check{ int a; public: const_check(int i); void print() const; void print2(); }; const_check::const_check(int i):a(i) {} void const_check::print() const { int a=19; cout<<"The value in a is:"<<a; } void const_check::print2() { int a=10; cout<<"The value in a is:"<<a; } int main(){ const_check b(5); const const_check c(6); b.print2(); c.print(); } void print() is constant member function of the class const_check, so according to the definition of constants if any attempt to change int a it should result in an error but the program works fine for me.I think i am having some confusion here, can anybody tell me why the compiler is not flagging it as an error??

    Read the article

  • Changing Value of Array Pointer When Passed to a Function

    - by ZAX
    I have a function which receives both the array, and a specific instance of the array. I try to change the specific instance of the array by accessing one of its members "color", but it does not actually change it, as can be seen by debugging (checking the value of color after function runs in the main program). I am hoping someone can help me to access this member and change it. Essentially I need the instance of the array I'm specifying to be passed by reference if nothing else, but I'm hoping there is an easier way to accomplish what I'm trying to do. Here's the structures: typedef struct adjEdge{ int vertex; struct adjEdge *next; } adjEdge; typedef struct vertex{ int sink; int source; int color; //0 will be white, 1 will be grey, 5 will be black int number; adjEdge *nextVertex; } vertex; And here is the function: void walk(vertex *vertexArray, vertex v, int source, maxPairing *head) { int i; adjEdge *traverse; int moveVertex; int sink; traverse = vertexArray[v.number-1].nextVertex; if(v.color != 5 && v.sink == 5) { sink = v.number; v.color = 5; addMaxPair(head, source, sink); } else { walk(vertexArray, vertexArray[traverse->vertex-1], source, head); } } In particular, v.color needs to be changed to a 5, that way later after recursion the if condition blocks it.

    Read the article

  • C++ Template Classes and Copy Construction

    - by themoondothshine
    Is there any way I can construct an new object from the given object if the template parameters of both objects are identical at run-time? For example: I have a template class with the declaration: template<typename _Type1, typename _Type2> class Object; Next, I have two instantiations of the template: template class Object<char, int>; template class Object<wchar_t, wint_t>; Now, I want to write a member function such as: template<typename _Type1, typename _Type2> Object<char, int> Object<_Type1, _Type2>::toCharObject() { if(__gnu_cxx::__are_same<_Type1, char>::__value) return *this; else { //Perform some kind of conversion and return an Object<char, int> } } I have tried a couple of techniques, such as using __gnu_cxx::__enable_if<__gnu_cxx::__are_same<_Type1, char>::__value, _Type1>::__type in a copy constructor for the Oject class, but I keep running into the error: error: conversion from ‘Object<wchar_t, wint_t>’ to non-scalar type ‘Object<char, int>’ requested Is there no way I can do this? Any help will be greatly appreciated!

    Read the article

  • Scoping problem with Javascript callback

    - by nazbot
    I am having some trouble getting a callback function to work. Here is my code: SomeObject.prototype.refreshData = function() { var read_obj = new SomeAjaxCall("read_some_data", { }, this.readSuccess, this.readFail); } SomeObject.prototype.readSuccess = function(response) { this.data = response; this.someList = []; for (var i = 0; i < this.data.length; i++) { var systemData = this.data[i]; var system = new SomeSystem(systemData); this.someList.push(system); } this.refreshList(); } Basically SomeAjaxCall is making an ajax request for data. If it works we use the callback 'this.readSuccess' and if it fails 'this.readFail'. I have figured out that 'this' in the SomeObject.readSuccess is the global this (aka the window object) because my callbacks are being called as functions and not member methods. My understanding is that I need to use closures to keep the 'this' around, however, I have not been able to get this to work. If someone is able show me what I should be doing I would appreciate it greatly. I am still wrapping my head around how closures work and specifically how they would work in this situation. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • static_cast from Derived* to void* to Base*

    - by Roberto
    I would like to cast a pointer to a member of a derived class to void* and from there to a pointer of the base class, like in the example below: #include <iostream> class Base { public: void function1(){std::cout<<"1"<<std::endl;} virtual void function2()=0; }; class Derived : public Base { public: virtual void function2(){std::cout<<"2"<<std::endl;} }; int main() { Derived d; void ptr* = static_cast<void*>(&d); Base* baseptr=static_cast<Base*>(ptr); baseptr->function1(); baseptr->function2(); } This compiles and gives the desired result (prints 1 and 2 respectively), but is it guaranteed to work? The description of static_cast I found here: http://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/static_cast only mentions conversion to void* and back to a pointer to the same class (point 10).

    Read the article

  • Force the use of interface instead of concrete implementation in declaration (.NET)

    - by gammelgul
    In C++, you can do the following: class base_class { public: virtual void do_something() = 0; }; class derived_class : public base_class { private: virtual void do_something() { std::cout << "do_something() called"; } }; The derived_class overrides the method do_something() and makes it private. The effect is, that the only way to call this method is like this: base_class *object = new derived_class(); object->do_something(); If you declare the object as of type derived_class, you can't call the method because it's private: derived_class *object = new derived_class(); object->do_something(); // --> error C2248: '::derived_class::do_something' : cannot access private member declared in class '::derived_class' I think this is quite nice, because if you create an abstract class that is used as an interface, you can make sure that nobody accidentally declares a field as the concrete type, but always uses the interface class. Since in C# / .NET in general, you aren't allowed to narrow the access from public to private when overriding a method, is there a way to achieve a similar effect here?

    Read the article

  • C++11 decltype requires instantiated object

    - by snipes83
    I was experimenting a little with the C++11 standard and came up with this problem: In C++11 you can use auto and decltype to automatically get return type for a function as, for example the begin() and end() functions below: #include <vector> template <typename T> class Container { private: std::vector<T> v; public: auto begin() -> decltype(v.begin()) { return v.begin(); }; auto end() -> decltype(v.end()) { return v.end(); }; }; My problem here is that I have to declare the private vector<T> v before the public declarations which is against my coding style. I would like to declare all my private members after my public members. You have to declare the vector before the function declaration because the expression in decltype is a call to vector member function begin() and requires an instance of the object. Is there a way around this?

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190  | Next Page >