This question already has answers here:
Can I call a base class's virtual function if I'm overriding it?
(8 answers)
Closed last year.
I'm struggling to find the right answer on below question on the internet.
I'm not a native C++ programmer and have more knowledge of OOP programming in PHP, Pascal, and JavaScript, but i can manage.
I want to create a class hierarchy to handle some tasks like displaying content on a LCD screen.
It looks like the following classes:
class base {
public:
base() { };
virtual void display() { // Need to be called first from all child objects };
virtual bool keyPress(int state) { //Need to be called first from all child objects };
};
class child : public base {
public:
child():base() {};
virtual void display() {
>> call base->display()
// do some stuff
};
virtual bool keyPress(int state) {
>> call base->keyPress(state)
// check some stuff
};
};
Most program language that i know of has some 'parent::' solution to call the inherited virtual method but i cant find anything comparable for C++.
an option that i going to use for now is:
class base {
protected:
virtual void _display() =0;
virtual bool _keyPress(int state) =0;
public:
base() { };
void display() {
// do basic stuff
_display();
};
bool keyPress(int state) {
if (!_keyPress(state)) {
// do basic stuff.
};
};
class child : public base {
protected:
virtual void _display() {
// do some stuff
};
virtual bool _keyPress(int state) {
// check some stuff
};
public:
child():base() {};
};
I do not like this method but it will work.
The right syntax is base::display():
class base {
public:
base() { };
virtual void display() { /* Need to be called first from all child objects*/ };
virtual bool keyPress(int state) { /*Need to be called first from all child objects*/ return 42; };
};
class child : public base {
public:
child():base() {};
virtual void display() {
base::display();
// do some stuff
};
virtual bool keyPress(int state) {
return base::keyPress(state);
// check some stuff
};
};
However, if it is the same in all child classes you better let base call its methods like you do it in your second code. It is not clear why you "do not like this method". It works, does what you want, and avoids lots of duplicate code and decreases chances for mistakes in the derived classes. Just note that the virtual methods need not be protected, because the derived classes are not supposed to call them directly, you can make them private: https://godbolt.org/z/1qjooKq85 (perhaps that is what you didn't like?).
Related
I have a parent class that invokes a callback that is abstract. The child class is meant to override this callback, but must never call it on its own from its code.
class Parent(){
public:
void Init(){ MyCallback(); }
protected:
virtual void MyCallback() = 0;//child must override, but child must never call it manually.
};
class Child : public Parent{
protected:
void MyCallback()override{ }
private:
void SomeCode{ MyCallback(); }//<---how to prevent this?
}
There are many callbacks such as these. I don't want the user to get lost and think that he should call any of them manually.
Is it possible to prevent these callbacks from being invoked by child class?
I don't think there is a way to enforce the rules you want at compile-time, but you can enforce them at runtime via assertion-failures, which is the next-best thing, since at least anyone who breaks the rule will learn the error of their ways the next time they run the program. Note that I've added a requirement that the subclass-overrides of MyCallback() must call up to the superclass-method exactly once, to prevent subclasses from gratuitously making additional calls to MyCallback() on themselves or their superclasses inside the callbacks-are-allowed context.
#include <stdio.h>
#include <stdlib.h>
class Parent
{
public:
Parent() : _okayToCallCount(0), _numParentClassCallsMade(0) {/* empty */}
protected:
virtual void MyCallback()
{
if (_okayToCallCount == 0) {printf("MyCallback() was called from an invalid context!\n"); abort();}
_numParentClassCallsMade++;
if (_numParentClassCallsMade > 1) {printf("Parent::MyCallback() was called more than once from the subclass's override-method!\n"); abort();}
}
private:
// This is the only place that MyCallback should EVER be called from!
void TheOnlyPlaceThatMyCallbackShouldEverBeCalledFrom()
{
_numParentClassCallsMade = 0;
_okayToCallCount++;
MyCallback();
_okayToCallCount--;
if (_numParentClassCallsMade < 1) {printf("Parent::MyCallback() was never called from the subclass's override-method!\n"); abort();}
}
int _okayToCallCount;
int _numParentClassCallsMade;
};
class Child : public Parent
{
public:
Child() {}
void SomeCode() { MyCallback(); }//<---how to prevent this?
protected:
virtual void MyCallback()
{
Parent::MyCallback(); // REQUIRED!
}
};
int main(int argc, char ** argv)
{
Child c;
c.SomeCode();
return 0;
}
Your Program had soo many mini Errors
class Parent(){ // These braces**()** don't come after a class's name
public:
void Init(){ MyCallback(); }
protected: // Because the datatype is protected, it can't be accessed properly (overrided) by **Main Function**
virtual void MyCallback() = 0;//child must override, but child must never call it manually.
};
class Child : public Parent{
protected:
void MyCallback()override{ }
private:
void SomeCode{ MyCallback(); }//<---how to prevent this? // You forgot the braces here **()**
} // You forgot the semi-colon **;**
Here I have fixed them for you:-
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class Parent {
public:
void Init(){ MyCallback(); }
//protected:
virtual void MyCallback() = 0;//child must override, but child must never call it manually.
};
class Child : public Parent{
protected:
void MyCallback()override{ cout <<"Child Class Function!"; }
private:
void SomeCode() { MyCallback(); }//<---how to prevent this?
};
int main()
{
Parent* ptr_base;
Child derived;
ptr_base = &derived;
ptr_base->MyCallback();
}
I have a class hierarchy like this:
class Base
{
public:
void start() { init(); }
private:
virtual void init() = 0;
};
class Default : public Base
{
private:
virtual void init() override {/*default implementation*/};
};
class Special : public Default
{
private:
virtual void init() override final {/*specialized implementation*/};
}
Which works alright if I call start() on an object of type Special;
Now I have a case where in the implementation in the Special class I want to call the implementation of the Default class.
Normally that would work with Default::init();, but will fail here due to the Defaults declaration of this is private.
Obviously one solution is to change this from private to protected, but I'd like to ask if there is another way? Rather than allowing any child to call this function directly, I'd like to limit this to calls that are initiated via virtual functions already defined in the Base or Default class.
Is there some option or modifier that would allow member function calls to be only allowed from child classes if they are within (the same) overriding virtual member functions?
C++ doesn't provide means to achieve this directly, so you'd have to work around, e. g. in piece of code below.
Well, if you absolutely want to. I personally would rather just fall back to making the functions protected, document what they are intended for and when to be called, and then just trust the deriving classes to do the stuff right. That in the end keeps the interfaces cleaner and doesn't rely on a rather unusual (and perhaps ugly) pattern (actually passing this twice).
class Base
{
public:
virtual ~Base() { }
void start()
{
InitProxy p(*this);
init(p);
}
protected:
class InitProxy
{
public:
InitProxy(InitProxy const&) = delete;
void init()
{
m_base.Base::init(*this);
}
private:
friend class Base;
Base& m_base;
InitProxy(Base& base)
: m_base(base)
{ }
};
private:
virtual void init(InitProxy& proxy) { }
};
class Derived : public Base
{
void init(InitProxy& proxy) override
{
proxy.init();
}
};
You could let the proxy accept a member function pointer, if you want to apply this constraint to more than one function, so you wouldn't have to re-write the proxy for every function separately. Possibly you'd need to make a template from then, if function parameters differ.
Forward declare Special, and make it a friend of Default:
class Base
{
public:
void start() { init(); }
private:
virtual void init() = 0;
};
class Special; // Forward declaration
class Default : public Base
{
private:
virtual void init() override {/*default implementation*/}
friend class Special; // Friend declaration
};
class Special : public Default
{
private:
virtual void init() override final {
Default::init();
/*Other implementation*/
}
};
I've been trying to find an answer to this question but I couldn't (I don't even know how to properly formulate this) so I decided to write my first post ever on StackOverflow =).
The context is the following:
I have this parent class:
class Parent
{
public:
Parent(){};
void foo(void)
{
//Do some common things
bar();
//Do some more common things
};
protected:
virtual void bar(void) = 0;
};
And I want to create an indefinite amount of derived Childs:
class Child1 : public Parent
{
public:
Child1() : Parent(), child1Variable(0) {};
protected:
virtual void bar(void) = 0;
private:
uint32_t child1Variable;
};
class Child2 : public Parent
{
public:
Child2() : Parent(), child2Variable(0) {};
protected:
virtual void bar(void) = 0;
private:
uint32_t child2Variable;
};
.
.
.
class ChildN : public Parent
{
public:
ChildN() : Parent(), childNVariable(0) {};
protected:
virtual void bar(void) = 0;
private:
uint32_t childNVariable;
};
The reason being mainly not repeating the code in Parent's foo()
Then I would like to create my final instantiable classes as, for instance:
class ExampleFinal : public Child1, public Child3, public Child27
{
//How to define Child1::bar(), Child3::bar() and Child27::bar() ??
private:
void bar(void); //????
};
So the questions are:
How can I define the method for (abusing notation) ExampleFinal::Child1::bar, ExampleFinal::Child3::bar, ...
Am I so stuck on this that I'm overlooking a much simpler solution?
The final goal is being able to do something like:
ExampleFinal test;
test.Child1::foo(); //should end up on "ExampleFinal::Child1::bar"
test.Child3::foo(); //should end up on "ExampleFinal::Child3::bar"
Thanks!
Implementing ExampleFinal::bar() (side-note: bar(void) is a C-ism which has no use in C++) will override all of the bars you have declared at once. If you want to have different versions, you'll need to interpose another layer of classes:
struct GrandChild1 : Child1 {
void bar() override { /*...*/ }
};
// And so on...
struct ExampleFinal : GrandChild1, GrandChild3, GrandChild27 {
// Nothing needed here.
};
Then the behaviour you described will work. Be aware, though, that your inheritance graph means that an ExampleFinal has one Parent subobject per Child. This is not an issue in itself but might not model what you want -- maybe you need virtual inheritance here, but beware of the rabbit hole.
If you want to keep the overrides for all ChildN::bars inside ExampleFinal, you can add tag-dispatching to discern them, at the cost of one more virtual call:
struct Parent {
void foo() {
bar();
};
protected:
template <class Child>
struct tag { };
virtual void bar() = 0;
};
struct Child1 : Parent {
protected:
virtual void bar(tag<Child1>) = 0;
void bar() final override {
return bar(tag<Child1>{});
}
int child1Var;
};
struct Child2 : Parent {
protected:
virtual void bar(tag<Child2>) = 0;
void bar() final override {
return bar(tag<Child2>{});
}
int child2Var;
};
struct ExampleFinal : Child1, Child2 {
protected:
using Parent::tag;
void bar(tag<Child1>) final override {
std::cout << "Child1::bar\n";
}
void bar(tag<Child2>) final override {
std::cout << "Child2::bar\n";
}
};
Note that the bar() to bar(tag<ChildN>) bridge can easily be hidden behind a macro. If you want to avoid the cost of the second virtual call, a CRTP can also be applied here.
The content
The question
Example
Why do I need it
Hi.
The question
I am facing a problem. I have a class A that has a base B (is polymorphic). In B class is method Print(), wich is virtual. In A class is also Print(). virtual.
Lets say I am given an A type object (or pointer), stored in B variable
B * object = new A();
And by calling
object->Print();
It calls the method in A class, but I also want it to call method in B class.
Technically
I want to call the method for each child until i reach class that has no child
This can be done as follows:
Example
class A
{
public:
virtual void Print() const override
{
cout << "A" << endl;
}
};
class B : public A
{
public:
virtual void Print() const override
{
cout << "B" << endl;
A::Print(); // i do not want to call it here...
}
};
The problem is that I do want not to be forced to call the
A::Print();
Why
Yes, you might be asking, what is the deal...
I have very long inheritance chain. (lets say that there are like 15 - 20 classes in the inheritance chain).
In a game, each one does some little thing.
Lets say
class GameObject
{
public:
virtual void Update() const
{
//updates position, recounts it towards screen
}
};
class Character : public GameObject
{
public:
virtual void Update() const override
{
// Updates lives, movement
}
};
class Warrior : public Character
{
public:
virtual void Update() const override
{
// Updates armor, specific stuff
}
};
Now this example is very simplified. Problem is, that if i forget to add a call base::Update() Then I am worndering why does it not work. Looking for such a misstake is hard. I mean, if there any way around it?
Thank you very much indeed for any responses.
Have a nice day
If indeed every class must call the base function, one way to ensure the functionality is enforced is to use the template pattern.
class GameObject
{
public:
void Updater()
{
Update(); // this is a virtual call
GameObject::Update(); // now call base
}
virtual void Update() const
{
}
};
class Character : public GameObject
{
public:
virtual void Update() const override
{
// Updates lives, movement
}
};
class Warrior : public Character
{
public:
virtual void Update() const override
{
// Updates armor, specific stuff
}
};
class Character : public GameObject
{
public:
virtual void Update() const override
{
// Updates lives, movement
}
};
class Warrior : public Character
{
public:
virtual void Update() const override
{
// Updates armor, specific stuff
}
};
Then always call YourObject::Updater(); instead of YourObject::Update(). The Updater function will call your object's Update function, and then return and call the base class Update.
There was once a proposal to get all the bases of a given type (N2965) which gcc actually implemented in <tr2/type_traits>. So, if portability is not a concern and you happen to be using gcc, you can write a catch-all like so:
struct A {
virtual ~A() = default;
virtual void print() { print_all(*this); }
void print_one() { std::cout << "A\n"; }
protected:
template <class T>
void print_all(T& object) {
object.print_one();
print_all(object, typename std::tr2::bases<T>::type{});
}
template <class T, class... Bases>
void print_all(T& object, std::tr2::__reflection_typelist<Bases...> ) {
using swallow = int[];
(void)swallow{0,
(static_cast<Bases&>(object).print_one(), 0)...
};
}
};
This splits up print(), which prints everything, and print_one() which just prints the one specific type. You just have your print() call print_all() with itself:
struct B : A {
void print() override { print_all(*this); }
void print_one() { std::cout << "B\n"; }
};
struct C : B {
void print() override { print_all(*this); }
void print_one() { std::cout << "C\n"; }
};
Otherwise, you'll have to wait for one of the reflection proposals to get adopted.
I've created a class named 'Device' which get inherited by multiple devices (for example, RFDevice, AccelleroDevice)
The Device class inherited a Thread class. This Threadclass includes a Pure virtual function named run. Is it possible to accesss this pure virtual function in RFDevice or AcelleroDevice.
So,
ThreadClass->DeviceClass->RFDeviceClass.
I've tried to add
' virtual void run(void) = 0' also in the device class but this wont work.
Greets,
Only if the virtual function is not private. If it is, then you cannot call it and are not supposed to, either:
class ThreadClass
{
public:
virtual ~ThreadClass() {}
private:
virtual void run() = 0;
};
class Device : public ThreadClass
{
};
class RFDevice : public Device
{
public:
void f()
{
run(); // compiler error
}
};
If it is protected or public, then it will work, provided there is an implementation of the function somewhere down the class hierarchy. But with the exception of the destructor, virtual functions should rarely be public or protected in C++:
class ThreadClass
{
public:
virtual ~ThreadClass() {}
protected:
virtual void run() = 0; // non-private virtual, strange
};
class Device : public ThreadClass
{
};
class RFDevice : public Device
{
protected:
virtual void run()
{
}
public:
void f()
{
run(); // works
}
};
Of course, this does not technically call the base function. And that's a good thing; you'd end up with a pure virtual function call otherwise, and your program would crash.
Perhaps what you need to do is to just implement the private virtual function. That would be the preferred class design:
class ThreadClass
{
public:
virtual ~ThreadClass() {}
void execute()
{
run();
}
private:
virtual void run() = 0;
};
class Device : public ThreadClass
{
};
class RFDevice : public Device
{
private:
virtual void run()
{
}
};
int main()
{
RFDevice d;
d.execute();
}
If you are not just maintaining a legacy code base, you should probably get rid of your thread class and use C++11 multi-threading.