how I want the code to look. Only problem is it doesn't work (Line 11). I have some experience with templates but I'm not a pro.
Basically I want the "Channels<3>" to be a type that I can use to specify a Cable with similar to vector<float/int> it would be Cable<Channels<2 or 3>>.
What have I messed up with the syntax?
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
using namespace std;
[Code].....
class IFoo {
virtual void Bar() = 0;
};
class FooAbstract {
virtual void Bar() {}
[Code] .....
How to call the Bar() method from FooTemplate in FooDerived::Bar()?
I have a class "Result" with a single template function Set(const std::string& arName, T& val) and a specialization of this function Set<Real>(const std::string& arName, Real& val) where Real is a typedef for double. The class is in a shared library and I use it in my main program. If I do result->Set<GLOBAL::Real>("U", 100.0); the wrong template function is called!
I check this by the output with std::cout.
Maybe it's a problem with the typedef.
If I link the object file of the Result class directly to my main program (no shared library), it works.
typedefs.hpp:
namespace GLOBAL {
typedef double Real;
} results.hpp
#include <iostream>
[Code] ....
class intClass{};
class stringClass{};
template <typename T>
class Mediator {
// bunch of code
};
I want Mediator<int> to declare intClass friend, Mediator<std::string> to declare stringClass friend etc..., without having to redefine the entire specialization
template<>
Mediator<int>::friend intClass;
I have a triple hierarchy class:
template<class T> class Singleton;
class Base;
class Sub : public Base, public Singleton<Sub>;
I' using underlying auto pointers, that's why Singleton is a template class and Sub passes itself as a template parameter. I'm developing Singleton and Base and a public API allows anyone to add their own sub classes. I actually want a real triple hierarchy like this:
template<class T> class Singleton;
class Base : public Singleton<Base>;
class Sub : public Base;
So that external developers don't have to worry about templates and complexity. The problem with this is that my implementation in Singleton will now call the constructor of Base whenever I create an instance of Sub (since the template parameter is Base).I was wondering if this could be done by pre-processor macros:
template<class T> class Singleton;
class Base : public Singleton<__CLASS_NAME__>;
class Sub : public Base;
Where __CLASS_NAME__ is the class name that will be replaced by the pre-processor. Theoretically this should be possible, since the __PRETTY_ FUNCTION__ macro actually returns the class name. The problem is that one cannot do string-manipulation to remove the function name from __PRETTY_FUNCTION__.
how I can accomplish this so that the Sub class is not aware of inheriting from a Singleton<template> class?
I'm trying to implement a simple template array class, but when i came into the operator< i actually have to use a template :
my code is something like :
template<typename _Type, std::size_t _Size>
class array {
public :
[Code] ......
but i am having an error of shadows template param 'class _Type' is it w/ the name conflict between the array template parameter and the function template parameter ?
Error1error C2955: 'DoubleLinkedListInterface' : use of class template requires template argument listdoublelinkedlist.h10
Error2error C2244: 'DoubleLinkedList<T>::DoubleLinkedList' : unable to match function definition to an existing declaration doublelinkedlist.cpp7
Error3 .cpperror C2244: 'DoubleLinkedList<T>::~DoubleLinkedList' : unable to match function definition to an existing declaration 12
.h
#pragma once
#include "DoubleLinkedListInterface.h"
#include "Node.h"
#include <iostream>
[Code]....
I have a generic template class with another template in one of its types. Now I want to specialize one of its methods for a particular (template) class, which leads to a compile error, however.
Here is the example:
#include <stdio.h>
template<typename Type>
class Obj1 {
public:
void ID() { printf("Object 1, size = %zu
[Code] .....
GCC ends with:
:35:27: error: type/value mismatch at argument 2 in template parameter list for ‘template<class Type, template<class> class O> class Foo’
:35:27: error: expected a class template, got ‘Obj2<Type>’
What is wrong with the specialization? Can it even be achieved and how (if so)?
I have a class like this
PHP Code:
template<class X>
class A {
X m_x;
public:
X* foo();
X* bar();
//others are not related to X
};
I would like to get rid of
PHP Code: template<class X>
For class level but still use it for members. Like this
PHP Code:
class A {
X m_x;
public:
template<class X>
X* foo();
template<class X>
X* bar();
//others are not related to X
};
However, I am still stuck at
PHP Code: X m_x;
Let me put it into the code snippet:
/**
This class build the singleton design pattern.
Here you have full control over construction and deconstruction of the object.
*/
template<class T>
class Singleton
[Code]....
I am getting error at the assertion points when i call to the class as follows:
osgOpenCL::Context *cxt = osgOpenCL::Singleton<osgOpenCL::Context>::getPtr();
I tried commenting assertion statements and then the debugger just exits at the point where getPtr() is called.
Unless I'm missing something, it's now possible(ish)? A little concept is below, very rough around the edges. Still though, if this is valid by standard C++, why can't we have built-in support for float / double template parameters?
#include <iostream>
#include <tuple>
template<int Numerator, int Denominator>
struct Float {
constexpr static float value()
[Code] ....
I have the defined a class Seconds with a template<int,int> constructor. Unfortunately, I can't seem to get an instance. Here's the class :
class Seconds {
public :
template <int num, int den> Seconds(long int);
}
And when I try to instantiate it :
Seconds *millis = new Seconds<1,1000>(30); // template argument deduction/substitution failed:
// couldn't deduce template parameter ‘num’
Is it not the right way to call the constructor?
Pseudocode:
template<typename T /*, some parameter for member_function */>
class Foo {
public:
void someFunction() {
T t;
t.member_fuction(...);
} }
I'm trying to make the call to T::member_function a templated value because member_function might vary by name in my scenario. Since std::mem_fn isn't a 'type', i can't do something like Foo<std::string, std::mem_fn(&std::string::clear)> foo;
I also want to take into account that member_function might have more than one parameter. That is, the first parameter will always be something known but there might be other defaulted parameters.
The only thing I can think of is to make a proxy structure, something like this:
template<typename T, T> struct proxy;
template<typename T, typename R, typename... Args, R (T::*member_function)(Args...)>
struct proxy<R (T::*)(Args...), member_function> {
R operator()(T &obj, Args.. args) {
return (obj.*member_function)(std::forward<Args>(args)...);
} }
Which would then allow me to do (for example) this:
Foo<std::string, proxy<void(std::string::*)(), &std::string::clear> >
when Foo is implemented like this:
template<typename T, typename member_function>
class Foo {
public:
void someFunction() {
T t;
member_function()(t);
} };
That implementation works for me.
I've been trying to create a templated class that takes a template as a parameter. I'd like to specialise this class for certain partial specializations of the template parameter but can't seem to figure out how to do it nor find anything online, (although I may be searching for the wrong thing).
As an example, say I have a class A that takes a template class with two parameters as its parameter:
template< template<class X, class Y> class Z > class A {};
I'd like to have a general version of A, for a general version of Z, but a specialisation of A for a specialisation of Z, e.g. where X is int but Y is still any type.
I've been playing around with this piece of code:
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include <algorithm>
template <void(*funky)(const std::string&)>
void callback()
{funky("Hello World!");}
[Code] ....
But when I try to build it, I get this error on line 24:could not convert template argument 'lambda' to 'void (*)(const string&) {aka void (*)(const std::basic_string<char>&)}'|
I thought the lambda expression I wrote would decay to a function pointer matching the template parameter. I can guess that the constexpr qualifier might have changed the type, but without it my compiler complains that lambda needs to be declared as constexpr...
So is there a way to pass lambda expressions as template parameters?
Without having to use std::function
Is there an "easy" way to define a template with a template parameter that could resolve to "nothing".
Code:
template <typename T1, typename T2, typename T3>
struct one_to_three {
public:
T1 t1;
T2 t2;
T3 t3;
};
Now I want to be able to instantiate that in such a way that T3 and T2 (if T3 also) resolve to "nothing".
Don't point me at tuple<>, this has to be a single structure. No dummy's, nothing effectively means nothing.
so on Win32
Code:
one_to_three <int, int, int> x;
sizeof(x) == 12;
one_to_three <int, nothing, nothing> y; // whatever 'nothing' needs to be.
sizeof(y) == 4;
T1 will never be 'nothing'
T2 will only be 'nothing' if T3 also is 'nothing' (if it works with T3 not being nothing, that's fine, but it won't get used that way).
Portability is a non-issue, this only needs to work in VS (2010 and higher). The 'real' solution will need up to T10, I have a solution working with SFINAE, but it takes very very long to compile and it's getting very unwieldy if you would need to add T11.
I know it's not an ideal type approach, but it is what it is, this is a necessity due to linking with a legacy API which we don't have control over.
Due to the nature of this requirement, I've made a very minimal example, which would adequately solve my issue, without resorting to use of pointers or copy constructors.
Basically I'm trying to pass an object as a reference to the template function, rather than a copy as it's seeing. I'm needing to do this without editing Obj::Call to accommodate a reference as its first parameter, as it'd break other calls.
You'll notice in the following code the object will be destroyed upon passing, while the object defined is still in-scope due to the infinite end loop.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
class Obj {
public:
string name;
[Code] ....
In the past I tried ref(), which appeared to stop this happening, however it created a blank copy of the object instead.
void extf(int a) { }
template<typename P>
struct A {
// 1
template< void (*F)(P) >
static void call(P arg) {
[Code]...
Why it is not working? What would be a proper way to pass function pointer as a template parameter?
Is this really the preferred way to get the return type, for use in a derived class, of a function defined in the template parameter?
template<class PARAMETER> class C {
protected:
typedef typeof (reinterpret_cast<PARAMETER*>(0))->function() returntype;
};
This works just fine for me, but seems inelegant.
I'm looking for a way to generate a program-wide unique value to use as a template parameter. Generating a unique value within a translation unit is pretty easy with __LINE__, but that doesn't ensure uniqueness across translation units. I thought maybe I could use __FILE__, but that can't be used as a template parameter.
I stumbled across this page: [uRL] ....
which is exactly what I want, except that the anonymous namespace trick doesn't work on all the compilers I've tried it on. (This may be due to C++11 changing anonymous namespaces to internal linkage rather than external as they did before....that page is five years old.)
I've was trying out a function template to automatically get the type of a lambda, but it seems that it won't compile
I've tried two different ways:
1.
template<class HASHER>
auto make_unordered_map(size_t bucketCount, HASHER const && hf)
-> unordered_map<string const, HASHER>&& {
return unordered_map<string const, int, HASHER>(bucketCount, hf);
} auto x = make_unordered_map(1, [](string const& key)->size_t { return key[0]; });
2.
template<class HASHER>
auto make_unordered_map(size_t bucketCount, HASHER const && hf2)
-> unordered_map<string const, int, decltype(hf2)> {
return unordered_map<string const, int, decltype(hf2)>(bucketCount, hf2);
} auto x = make_unordered_map(1, [](string const& key)->size_t { return key[0]; });
The test code are located here:
1. [URL] ....
2. [URL] ....
They are both based on the code that is stated to work in those examples. I.e.:
auto hf = [](string const& key)->size_t { return key[0]; };
unordered_map<string const, int, decltype(hf)> m (1, hf);
Basically I'm trying to pass an object as a reference to the template function, rather than a copy as it's seeing. I'm needing to do this without editing Obj::Call to accommodate a reference as its first parameter, as it'd break other calls.
You'll notice in the following code the object will be destroyed upon passing, while the object defined is still in-scope due to the infinite end loop.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
class Obj {
public:
string name;
Obj(string name): name(name) {cout << "create " << this << endl;}
[code]....
In the past I tried ref(), which appeared to stop this happening, however it created a blank copy of the object instead.
I have a function:
template<class Iterator, class T>
void a(Iterator, Iterator, const T&);
and I want to be able to simplify calls to 'a' with calls like
a(someIteratableContainer);
instead of having to call:
a(someIteratableContainer.begin(), someIteratableContainer.end(), valueOfTheContainersElementType);
I also want to be able to generalize the function to handle any of the standard iteratable contains: array, vector, deque, whatever.
I was under the impression I could write:
template<template<class T> class U> a(U<T>& container) {
a(container.begin(), container.end(), g(T()));
}
where 'g()' returns an object of the element type. However, the compiler is claiming, no matter how I write a call to the overload, the original template is selected and/or the overload is invalid, depending on the various ways I attempt to write said overload.
[URL]
#include <iostream>
struct Outer {
template<typename T>
void go() {
std::cout << Test<T>::f() << std::endl;
[Code] .....
I have tried several variants on this code to no avail. Outer is in a header, along with the extern template statements, and the specializations after main are in their own cpp file. Main is in a different cpp file.
What do have to do to make this work? I cannot bring the definitions of f() into the header, and they will be different for different template parameters. Ideally, I want Test to remain a private member of Outer, though this can change if it's the only option.
I have been trying to get a hang on templates. I have the two following functions that that could be consolidated in a single template function:
void Attractor::updateFamilies(FamiliesController *_tmp, int _counter){
center.x = ofGetWidth()/2;
center.y = ofGetHeight()/3;
attractorCounter = _counter;
if(attractorCounter == 1){
[Code] .....
NotesController and FamiliesController have the same parent. The thing that I'm trying to grasp with templates is that is could something like:
template<class TYPE>
void Attractor::updateData(TYPE* *_tmp, int _counter){
center.x = ofGetWidth()/2;
center.y = ofGetHeight()/3;
attractorCounter = _counter;
[Code] ....
And then have another template function declaration for all the attractor functions where I pass the same template value as in the first one.
As you can see, I'm calling another functions inside called attractors(_tmp). I know that one way around it could be to get rid of that function and just do all the logic inside of each if statement. Is there any way to pass the same template function parameter within a template function parameter?
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] ,....