class BaseExcep {
protected:
std::string message;
public:
BaseExcep(std::string);
virtual void printException();
[Code] .....
Here i need to find which exception type is actually thrown.
Whether it is DerivedExcep1 or DerivedExcep2 or BaseExcep itself.
I can't use dynamic_cast in this, since it is a reference ....
Say I have 3 classes:
class Player {
public:
virtual func1();
[code]....
Say in my main class, I have a function fight(Player p1, Player p2) and I would like to do something like this in the fight function, given that p1 is the human and p2 is the computer:
//function fight()
fight(Player p1, Player p2) {
p1.func2();
}
//using function fight()
fight(human, computer);
When I compile the program, I got this: error: ‘class Player’ has no member named 'func2()' What can I do to allow p1 to call func2 inside fight()? I'm not allowed to use pointers as the parameter for fight() and have to use the signature fight(Player p1, Player p2).
The compiler creates virtual table for the base class and also for the derived class whether we override it or not.
That means each class has separate virtual table. when we get the size of the each class with out any data members... the size of base is -- 4 bytes(64 bit) and the size of derived is -- 1
The size of base class 4 is correct since it creates the virtual pointer internally and its size is member data + virtual pointer, but it in this case I have included any data members so it has given 4 byts.
But why in case of derived is 1 byte, since it the derived class has overridden the virtual function from base, this will also contains the virtual pointer which will be pointing to derived class Vtable, it the size of the class suppose to be 4 instead of 1 byte.
#include<iostream>
class A{
public:
[Code].....
I have my main.cpp like this:
#include <iostream>
#include "curve1.h"
#include "curve2.h"
using namespace std;
int main() {
Curve1 curve1Obj;
Curve2 curve2Obj;
[Code]...
Base class Score has two derived classes Curve1 and Curve2. There are two curve() functions, one is in Curve1 and other in Curve2 classes. getSize() returns the value of iSize.
My base class header score.h looks like this:
#ifndef SCORE_H
#define SCORE_H
class Score {
private:
int *ipScore;
float fAverage;
int iSize;
[Code]...
You can see that I have used curve1Obj to enter scores, calculate average and output. So if I call getSize() function with cuve1Obj, it gives the right size that I took from user in enterScores() function. Also the result is same if I call getSize() in score.cpp definition file in any of the functions (obviously).
.....
The problem is when I call curve() function of Curve2 class in main (line 23) with the object curve2Obj, it creates a new set of ipScore, fAverage and iSize (i think?) with garbage values. So when I call getSize() in curve() definition in curve2.cpp, it outputs the garbage. .....
How can I cause it to return the old values that are set in curve1.cpp?
Here is my curve2.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include "curve2.h"
using namespace std;
void Curve2::curve() {
cout << "getSize() returns: " << getSize() << endl; // out comes the garbage
}
Can I use a function to simply put values from old to new variables? If yes then how?
In this book, item 3 is about never treat arrays polymorphically. In the latter part of this item, the author talks about the result of deleting an array of derived class objects through a base class pointer is undefined. What does it mean? I have an example here,
Code:
class B
{
public:
B():_y(1){}
virtual ~B() {
cout<<"~B()"<<endl;
[Code] ....
This sample code does exactly what I want. So does the author mean the way I did is undefined?
Please consider the following code :
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class superclass;
class subclass1;
class subclass2;
[Code] ....
As you can see I want to create a dynamically allocated storage of references to a parent class each of which can then point to a child class, how ever I do not know how to extract the child class out again from that array so i may access its variable b.
Let's say I have a Car object , and it contains inner Engine object.
Code:
struct Car{
Engine mEngine;
};
In order to initialize the engine object NOT by the default constructor (if it has any) , we use initialization semantics:
Code:
Car::Car:
mEngin(arg1,arg2,...)
{
other stuff here
}
Now it gets tricky: Let's say a Car objects has 10 inner objects, each object has about 5 variables in it . Car is a base class for , e.g. , Toyota class. you don't want the Car class to have a constructor with 50 arguments. Can the inner objects of Car be initialized from the base class , e.g. Toyota?
Code:
class Toyota:
Car(...),
mEngine(...),
mGear(..)
{
...
};
The other options are:
1) like said , create a Car constructor which gets 50 arguments, then initialize Car as whole from Toyota - the code becomes less readable and less intuitive
2) Car constructor which get built-objects as arguments and initialize the inner objects with copy constructor . the code gets more readable but then you create many excess objects .
So I have a base class, lets call it base. In base I have a virtual function called update(), update just couts "base" then I have a class derived from base called derived;
it has a function called update(), update just couts "derived" then I create a vector called Vec it's initialised like this:
std::vector<base> Vec;
then I add an element into it like this
Derived DerElement;
Vec.push_back(DerElement);
then when I type:
for (int i=0; i<Vec.size(); i++) {
Vec.at(i).Update();
}
It outputs:
Derived DerElement2;
DerElement2.Update();
and it outputs this:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
class Base {
public:
virtual void Update() {
[Code] .....
and this is it's output:
Base
Derived
Press any key to continue . . .
I would like to know if there's a way to make a method from a derived class a friend of its base class. Something like:
class Derived;
class Base {
int i, j;
friend void Derived::f();
protected:
Base();
[Code] ......
I have an example where I have a variable belonging to a base class, but I would like to tell the compiler that it actually belongs to a derived class. How can I do this?
// base class: R0
// derived class: R1
// see function SetR1 for the problem
class R0 {
public:
int a;
[Code] .....
I just wondering if a base class can call the overridden function from a Derived class?
Here's an example:
//Base Class H
class BaseClass {
public:
BaseClass();
virtual ~BaseClass();
virtual void functionA();
[Code] ....
So basically, when I am creating a new object of Derived class, it will initialize BaseClass and the BaseClass will call functionA but I want it to call the function overridden by Derived class.
I know that if I call newObj->functionA it will call the overridden function. Right now I want the base class to call the overridden function "this->functionA(); in BaseClass" during its initialization. Is it possible to do that?
Basically, I have a base class called MainShop and it has 3 derived classes which are SwordShop, SpellBookShop and BowShop. I want the base class to be able to call a function from one of the derived classes but no matter what i do, it doesn't seem to work!
Here is my code:
#include "MainShop.h"
//BaseClass cpp
void MainShop::EnterShop(Hero& hero)
[Code]....
I have two other derived classes, but its basically the same concept. I have a function in one of the derived classes and i would like to call it from the base class. This is one my derived classes:
//SwordShop derived cpp
#include "SwordShop.h"
void SwordShop::soldierShop(Hero& hero)
{
/* some code here*/
}
Base class has an array, whose size is controlled by the derived class.
I can't use the STL and use a 2003 compiler, so things like std::vector and std::array are out. I also can't use dynamic memory allocation.
So I thought of a few options:
1.
template <int N> class myBaseClass { ... int array[N]; ... }
then class MyClass: public myBaseClass<8> ... etc ...
2.
have a int **array in the base and assign in the derived class.
3.
give the base some virtual methods such as int *getArray or even int &getInt for more safety.
I understand it is done like this
// Calling the base class constructor
explicit CCandyBox(double lv, double wv, double hv, const char* str="Candy"): CBox(lv, wv, hv)
{
...
}
But how does the compiler know that you are initializing the base "part" of the object?
Or is this the entire reason initialization lists exist, to separate this confusion?
I'm having some difficulties in understanding the topic which I stated above.
View 5 Replies View RelatedIf Yes, then why this syntax does not works :
class Derived : public Base {
public:
Derived& operator=(const Derived &rhs) {
operator =(static_cast<const Base&>(rhs));
[Code] ....
I have an abstract base class - let's call it MyInterface - and a class that most classes in my program inherit from, let's call it MyBaseclass.
Let's assume that all my objects inherit MyBaseclass, some of which also inherit MyInterface. Now I want to collect objects in a container class, MyContainerclass. The container class is only interested in objects that implement MyInterface.
Now I know that all objects that inherit MyInterface also inherit MyBaseclass, but the compiler doesn't know that. MyContainerclass wants to call methods in MyBaseclass, but it collects pointers to MyInterface classes. I can't make MyInterface inherit MyBaseclass, because I will be using classes that I don't want to change (they are part of a framework) that already inherit MyContainerclass. IOW, I can't use virtual inheritance to get a nice inheritance diamond.
To sum up, I want to create a container class that:
1. Collects objects that implement MyInterface.
2. Calls MyBaseclass methods on the collected objects.
I'm trying to implement a class hierarchy and a wrapper class with a pointer to the base class. The base class has operator< overloaded and the implementation makes use of virtual functions as some of the logic for sorting is in the derived classes. Unfortunately, when trying to use the base class operator< from the wrapper, I get a "pure virtual method called".
Below code is meant to illustrate my problem. Unfortunately it crashes on me (upon destruction of vec) and I cannot quite see, why. So two questions:
1. spot the error I made in the code below (having lived in Java-land for the last 5 years, I'm sure I just did some stupid error)?
2. How can I implement Wrapper::operator< to use Base::operator<? I know I could write a function and pass it to sort but I'm interessted if there is a way to actually use Base::operator<.
Code:
#include <vector>
#include <algorithm>
#include <cmath>
[Code].....
What I want is simple: I want to catch a dialog box!
The dialog box pops very frequently in a website. We have to put a username and password and press OK. I checked with spy++. It doesn't have any child windows. So catching the dialog box with windows API is ruled out. It must be a HTML dialog. I have to get DOM COM interfaces of the dialog.
Another option may be to make an add-on to get the interface to IWebBrowser2 and get the events fired. The title of the dialog box is "Authentication Required". If the events will be fired for that dialog box, I can check the title using IHTMLDocument2::get_Title.But will the events be fired for HTML dialog box? How to catch that desturbing dialog box.
Writing a smart array class for my C++ class. I'm running into a problem where the constructor apparently throws the wrong exception. Compiled on G++ with C++11 extensions enabled.
Code:
// headers
#include <iostream>
#include <utility>
#include <cctype>
// stuff we need from namespace std
using std::cout;
using std::cin;
[Code] .....
When I try to check the error-handling code, when I enter a size less then two, Array's ctor throws InvalidSize, and gets caught, all good. But when I enter a letter, the ctor also seems to throw InvalidSize!
In order to test catching exceptions from an initializer list, I deliberately did bad practice by hard coding an argument to a ctor that would cause a std::bad_allocto be thrown. Obviously better practice is to send a variable, but that would cause a compile error, so I hard coded a value.
The program I wrote creates Prime Numbers up to a specified limit which is an argument to the ctor of type std::size_t. The program works fine IMO, using g++ in cygwin:
$ time ./PrimesExe
Limit is 2000000
148933 Primes Created
real 0m1.210s
user 0m1.123s
sys 0m0.046s
Now when I send something invalid like a negative number or something too big for std::size_t, the program seems to run indefinitely, when compiled with g++ under cygwin. I haven't tested it yet on Linux.
However, if I do the same on VS2013 express, it takes about 15 seconds to print the expected caught exception message. I was not expecting it to take so ridiculously long compared to the reasonable amount of work involved in doing primes up to 2 million.
I have read up about what is involved in catching exceptions: stack unwinding, keeping track of what needs to be destroyed etc. But this is 1 object with 1 ctor argument, no Base classes or any other complications. So why such a long or indefinite amount of time?
This whole example is probably contrived, and I am wondering whether exceptions is the right tool for this - it is similar to the divide by zero problem, or could be considered a programming error to call a ctor with a bad argument?
Also, catching an exception thrown by an initalizer list seems a bit awkward in that one seems to have enclose the creation of the object and all subsequent uses of it (and any code in between ) in the same try block, otherwise it goes out scope. I suppose I could try to write a wrapper function that returns a smart pointer reference to a valid object, but I would have to test the validity of it's return too. That's the awkward part - there is probably a better way?
Are there any recommended ways of recovering from initializer list exception, that is, to allow the user to enter a new hopefully valid value and try to create the object again?
I have something like this
class A{//interface}; //implementation
class B{//interface includes a member of type 'A'}; //in implementation of Class 'B' constructor I write
B::B():A(5){} //class 'A' had a constructor of prototype A(int);
now what compiler tells me is
[Error] type 'A' is not a direct base of 'B'
I have run into a problem which is mostly just an annoyance. I need to know if i can have pass a derived class to a function which has the base class as its parameter. For example i have been creating a program but i have a function which needs to work for multiple classes all derived from the BaseObject class
Code :
class folder : public BaseObject
{}
class BaseObject
{void function(BaseObject B)}
how would i get the following to work:
function(folder)
A pointer to base class, if assigned to a derived class, only points to the base part right? So you can only use the base part of the derived class with that pointer and no methods from the derived class?
View 8 Replies View RelatedI am working on a program for school and I have managed to get everything to work, except the last portion of the program. It seems that the program is not calling the last function EmployeeSummary. The program will compile, and will accept data and compute overtime pay, etc. Just won't go on to the last function.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <iomanip>
using namespace std;
class CPayroll {
[Code] ...
I have encountered a problem I can't see to solve. I want to access a function and can't seem to find the right combination to get me there. Here is what I am looking at:
CFoo1::CFoo2::GetStrDataC(int nRow) const
How do I call the GetStrDataC function from another class?