C++ :: In Class Static Map Initialization
Nov 17, 2014
I have a class containing a map member that I want to initialize at declaration time. I know I can do it in the cpp file but I'm having a problem with the order of initialization (static initialization order fiasco).
My questions are:
Is it possible that the scenario in which, the Test's constructor's implementation and the map initialization instruction are in the same cpp file and constructor is called when the map is not initialized yet, could happen?
Is it possible to initialize the map in class like I did? I get these errors:
in-class initialization of static data member 'std::map<std::basic_string<char>, Test*> Test::a' of incomplete type
temporary of non-literal type 'std::map<std::basic_string<char>, Test*>' in a constant expression
If yes, does this initialization resolve the static initialization order fiasco?
class Test {
public:
static std::map<std::string, Test*> a = {};//this is an error
Test(std::string ID) {
[Code] ....
View 4 Replies
ADVERTISEMENT
Jun 5, 2013
I am having a problem concerning a static const member variable I want to use to set a certain property of my class during development time. The question actually concerns proper implementation as I do have a solution that "works" at least. The variable should denote the size of a member array which I don't want to allocate on the heap due to serious performance issues. So here is my code:
//MyClass.h
class MyClass{
public:
static const int MyArraySize = 256;
private:
int MyArray[MyArraySize];
};
This works but it's not nice for two reasons:
1) It doesn't separate interface from implementation. I would prefer to define the variable in the corresponding .cpp file but it doesn't work:
//MyClass.h
class MyClass{
public:
static const int MyArraySize;
[Code] .....
If I delete the line int MyArray[MyArraySize]; the above code works but when I use it to define the size of the array I get a "constant expression expected" error for the line int MyArray[MyArraySize]; which makes sense as the compiler does not know the value of MyArraySize when he reaches int MyArray[MyArraySize]; and therefore can not allocate the memory. Of course I can move MyArray to the heap like that:
//MyClass.h
class MyClass{
public:
static const int MyArraySize;
static const int MyValue;
[Code] .....
But as I mentioned before this causes a remarkable loss of performance.
Something like the following does not work:
//MyClass.h
class MyClass{
public:
static const int MyArraySize = (int) pow(2, 8);
private:
int MyArray[MyArraySize];
};
This gives a "constant expression expected" error for the line static const int MyArraySize = (int) pow(2, 8);
Interestingly the following code works:
//MyClass.h
class MyClass{
public:
static const int MyValue;
};
//MyClass.cpp
#include "MyClass.h"
const int MyClass::MyValue = (int) pow(2, 8);
So if I use pow outside of the class definition I get no errors. Is there any solution to those problems? So what I want is:
1) Don't allocate the array on the heap
2) Separate interface from implementation
3) Being able to use functions like pow to define MyArraySize
4) Not use global variables
View 19 Replies
View Related
Oct 11, 2013
What does the order of console output from your program tell you about when the static object is initialized?
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
//class
class Firstclass {
private:
Firstclass(); //constructor
~Firstclass(); //destructor
[Code] ....
Doesn't it allocate the class static variable to the heap, thus executing its algorithm then destroying it when the program ends - or. What exactly does it tell me? When the static variable is initialized, it takes place first before any of my other functions?
View 7 Replies
View Related
Apr 17, 2013
From my book:
"A static function might have this prototype:
static void Afunction(int n);
A static function can be called in relation to a particular object by a statement such as the following:
aBox.Afunction(10);
The function has no access to the non-static members of aBox. The same function could also be called without reference to an object. In this case, the statement would be:
CBox::Afunction(10);
where CBox is the class name. Using the class name and the scope resolution operator tells the compiler to which class Afunction() belongs."
Why exactly cant Afunction access non-static members?
View 7 Replies
View Related
Aug 22, 2014
Have following code:
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
[Code]....
My question according to what i just wrote:
1. Is that mean that Do() is only available for use by Dog itself because Dog is 'oryginal' Dog, and if i create new dogs - instances of oryginal Dog (dog1, dog2 ...) they cant access because Do is only available fo 'oryginal' one? Is that correct thinking?
2. If i would want to have something common (e.g value) for all dogs is that good way to create static field/method for Dog instead of non-static once then all instances of Dog would access Dog static member to get/change it? Just stupid example: static method GetAmountOfLegs() which return 4 Then all instances can take/call that value from Dog. Is that correct thinking?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Apr 1, 2013
I've defined a class with a copy constructor. Some sample code:
Class* c = new Class(*this) // My copy constructor must take in a const Class&
And the compiler gives:
error: cannot convert 'Class' to 'Class*' in initialization
Why does this syntax work with other data types? For example, int* MyInt = new int; compiles fine. What about a copy constructor makes it fail?
View 4 Replies
View Related
Jun 17, 2014
i'm currently working on a research project and i've been given some specifications
Is there a way i can access/use the array initialisation list i.e
{value,value,value}; .
For my own class? Like this
myclass foo={value,value,value};
View 3 Replies
View Related
Dec 18, 2013
Is it possible to initialize class member variables in their definition statement instead of using a constructor?
Is the code bellow correct?
class rectangle
{
float a=0;
float b=0;
public:
string color="Red";
...
};
Which C++ Standard allows it?
View 2 Replies
View Related
Oct 29, 2014
I recently discovered the new - new to me anyway! - feature of modern C++ that allows you to set the initial value of a data member when you declare it:
class CINTWrapper{
private:
int m_iData=0;
};
This even extends to calling member functions that work with initialization I believe:
class CStringWrapper{
private:
wchar_t* Allocate_Array(const int iBufferSize);
wchar_t* m_pString=Allocate_Array(1);
};
At first, this seemed an extremely useful piece of functionality that C++ had been lacking all along. However, the more I thought about it the more it struck me this feature actually undermines one of the principle design elements of the language - that being the Constructor.
As I understand it the primary purpose of the Constructor is specifically to give the programmer a place where it is guaranteed he can always initialize his data members before anything else is done with the class. However, given the new initialization rules this is no longer necessary. So it largely seems to me that Constructors as a whole are no longer necessary either! Copy-Constructors are a special and vital case. Admittedly when I was using them for their intended purpose I hated either the redundancy you had to introduce across multiple Constructors; those with and without arguments and so on, or alternately the fine tuning of helper-functions to do common initialization between these variants. Now however I sort of regret this cast-iron rule has been taken away.
As a last point, I am trying to change the way I think about programming. I am trying to employ more objects than pure C-style ('int' or 'double', etc) data types and especially to move into templates (although absolutely NOT the Hewlett Packard template library!). Given my current understanding of inheritance in particular it seems to me that using pre-initialized data members rather than Constructor-initialization makes object derivation even more complicated, not less so.
View 16 Replies
View Related
Oct 7, 2014
How to initialize a static member of a class with template, which type is related to a nested class?
This code works (without nested class):
#include<iostream>
using namespace std;
struct B{
B(){cout<<"here"<<endl;}
};
template<typename Z>
[Code] ,....
View 1 Replies
View Related
May 21, 2013
Code:
class Base {
public:
int base;
Base(int init=0):base(init){}
virtual ~Base(){}
[Code] .....
Invalid initialization of non-const reference of type 'Base&' from an rvalue of type 'Derived'
What does it mean, and why can't I return the Derived class by value (I'm trying to create an exact copy of Derived).
View 9 Replies
View Related
Dec 17, 2013
it seems everytime i use statics in a class i come across with a porblem.
this time i wanted to make a class i created static inside another class.
MainVariables.h file
static fge::window mWinMain;
if someone ever wants to reach it
MainVariables.cpp file
fge::window MainVariables::mWinMain;
...
...
fge::window MainVariables::GetWinMain()
{
return mWinMain;
}
but when i created some other MainVariables classes at other places instead of them reaching to the same window two window is being created.
yes i know maybe there are better methods but currently i m working on polymorphism and i need some static members.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Jul 27, 2013
What is the purpose of having static object of the same class.
E.g.
class someObj{
public:
static someObj obj;
};
how the compiler treats this object
View 3 Replies
View Related
Mar 14, 2014
I am developing logging class and it loos like below now, my question here is I would like to avoid situation to call this class methods multiple times in same time - as I've read when I have static class or even static method (not exactly whole class) it can be call only once in time. Is this true and whether my class would pass the concept to avoid multi accessing - lets say in case of multithreading case - if one task would try to call statuc method when there is already some other trad using it.
public static class Log {
public static string EngineName { get; set; }
private static List<String> logdata = new List<string>();
public static void LogMessage(string msg, ELogflag flag, string title = "") {
StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
[code]....
And my new Enum:
enum ELogflag {
LOG,
ENGINE,
CRITICAL,
CUSTOM
}
View 14 Replies
View Related
Oct 14, 2012
I am studying the use of static data into classes and the code below is returning an error ...
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class REC {
private:
static int n; //Dado que sera unico na classe e alterado por todos os objetos
[Code] .....
The error:
main.obj:-1: error: LNK2001: unresolved external symbol "private: static int REC::n" (?n@REC@@0HA)
Note: I'm using QT Creator
View 3 Replies
View Related
Oct 10, 2013
If I need a static pointer to a class that is used globally(multiple files), and I only want to allocate memory once.
One way is to create a function that returns a static pointer of type class and call it where ever you need this pointer. My question is there another way to do this like with a header file and include the header file where you need to use the object of type class.
static class* function
{
static class c;
if (c == NULL)
{
c = new class;
}
return c
}
View 1 Replies
View Related
Nov 11, 2014
I have the following code:
class Element {
public:
..
virtual unsigned NumberOfNodes() = 0;
[Code] ....
Is it possible to implement this better? All the element stuff can be static, but this is not possible with the abstract class. I want to have Mesh independent of a specific element. With the code above, if I have multiple meshes I have one instance of an element, e.g., Triangle for each mesh. Although they are all exactly the same.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jun 17, 2012
i have this rather large class, which (in a way) somehow resembles a custom dialog control). This control is supposed to display data, which it does just fine. To do so, it maintains a
byte settings[10];
array, which holds information on how to display the data.
There are multiple ways to represent this custom set of data.In order to remain flexible in representing it, i thought of implementing some sort of DisplayProvider, which can be registered to the base class and provides that settings byte array.
Preferably, i would now have a set of static const instances of this provider.Using a struct would work nicely here:
PHP Code:
struct DisplayProvider
{
int settings[10];
}
static const DisplayProvider prov1 = {1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,0};
The problem: The DisplayProvider would have to do some pre-processing, before handing over control to the base class, which then does the main work.I would end up with something like this:
PHP Code:
class DispalyProvider
{
baseclass* owner;
int settings[10];
void PreProcessing(...);//ends up calling the owner.Processing(...) function
};
The main thing here is, that i dont really see a way to create a stock of default "static const DisplayProvder = {...}"s, as i could when using a struct.
View 7 Replies
View Related
Aug 4, 2013
My Fraction.h class looks like :
class Fraction {
int num;
unsigned int den;
public:
Fraction(int = 1,int =1);
//Constants of Datatype
[Code] ....
The implementation Fraction.cpp is as follows :
#include "Fraction.h"
Fraction::Fraction(int n, int d):num(n),den(d){
cout << This is double param constructor <<endl;
}
And the application main.cpp is
int main(){
Fraction f1(3,9);
f1 = Fraction::sc_fUnity; // how to implement this ?
}
How can I write the Fraction.cpp for the constant static member ?
View 6 Replies
View Related
Aug 19, 2014
I have the following problem: I am using NLOpt for optimization. The API provides functions to set the objective. This is done as follows:
double objective(const vector<double> &x, vector<double> &grad, void *data)
{
return x[1]*x[0];
}
int main(){
nlopt::opt opti(nlopt::LD_MMA,2);
opti.set_min_objective(objective,NULL);
vector<double> x(2);
[Code]....
Now I want to make the function objective a member of a class:
class Foo {
public:
double objective(...){..}
};
How can I give this method to opti.optimize? If I make objective static I can use
opti.optimize(Foo::objective,NULL);
but I do not want to have a static member. Is it possible to create an object of type Foo and give it to opti.optimize?
View 1 Replies
View Related
Jan 17, 2013
I have a little problem with template classes and their specialization. Here is a short example:
template <typename T>
struct A{
// some typedefs
[Code]....
The above example is not compiling, because of the assignment of the const static double. Double needs a constructor, but that doesn't work (or seems not to work) with static.
I'm not sure, if it works at all in C++ that way. All I want is a template struct with some typedefs and a constant which is different for different specializations. Don't think it has to be static, but that would be better style, wouldn't it?
View 3 Replies
View Related
Apr 3, 2013
How to use static in a class, function and variable.
View 1 Replies
View Related
Sep 13, 2013
I have a non-MFC static library which I share between a number of different projects, some non-MFC and some MFC. Currently the static library uses a typedef of std::wstring and std::string for UNICODE and non-UNICODE builds.
After discovering it's possible to use CString in non-MFC applications, by including atlstr.h header, I decided I'd rather that than using stl strings and having to keep converting between the different types. However, I seem to be struggling with linker errors when linking the library with a MFC application.
Can I create a non-MFC static library using CString from atlstr.h and link it with a MFC application?
View 11 Replies
View Related
Apr 17, 2013
"You cannot initialize the static data member in the class definition — that’s simply a blueprint for an object and initializing values for members are not allowed. You don’t want to initialize it in a constructor, because you want to increment it every time the constructor is called so the count of the number of objects created is accumulated."
Why don't you want to initialize it in a constructor?
Edit: Because every time it is called it will set it back to 0 or whatever the initializing value.
View 2 Replies
View Related
Dec 3, 2014
A have two classes, one inheriting the other, and the parent class being abstract (I plan on adding more child classes in the future). For reasons I won't bother mentioning, I'm making use of an STL container as a way for me to access all of the child objects in the heap. I've done so by making use of a map, with key type int and value type being a pointer to the parent class:
//PARENT.H
class Parent {
protected:
static int n;
static std::map<int, Parent*> map;
public:
virtual void pureVirtual() = 0;
[code]....
The Problem:In line 5 of Parent.cpp, initializing the value of the element to new Child won't work, as according to the compiler, the Child class hasn't been declared yet, and including Child.h into the Parent.h only opens an even bigger can of worms.I also can't initialize it as new Parent, seeing as the parent class is an abstract one.
The Question:Is there a way I can initialize the static map properly. Making the Parent class abstract is not an option.
View 3 Replies
View Related
Jul 11, 2012
For example, in a header file A.h, I define an abstract class,
Code:
// A.h
class A {
public:
virtual void foo() = 0;
private:
static int _x;
};
How'd I initialize static member data _x?Normally, we initialize a static member data in a cpp file. However, there is not cpp file for A.h. If I intialize _x in header file, there will be linker errors like mulitple defined symbols. What is appropriate way to do that?
View 4 Replies
View Related
