Creating instances for a linked list class in C++ - c++

I am currently learning C++ linked list and I hit this piece of code from the textbook.I have trouble understanding this:
const string& e
I am trying to write some instances for this class in my main function to see how things works but don't know how.
For example, I want to add 3, 5, 7 to the list and add 1 to the front of the list, than delete 7 from the list.
#include <cstdlib>
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using std::string;
using namespace std;
class StringNode { // a node in a list of strings
private:
string elem; // element value
StringNode* next; // next item in the list
friend class StringLinkedList; // provide StringLinkedList
// access
};
class StringLinkedList { // a linked list of strings
public:
StringLinkedList(); // empty list constructor
~StringLinkedList(); // destructor
bool empty() const; // is list empty?
const string& front() const; // get front element
void addFront(const string& e); // add to front of list
void removeFront(); // remove front item list
private:
StringNode* head; // pointer to the head of list
};
StringLinkedList::StringLinkedList() // constructor
: head(NULL) { }
StringLinkedList::~StringLinkedList() // destructor
{ while (!empty()) removeFront(); }
bool StringLinkedList::empty() const // is list empty?
{ return head == NULL; }
const string& StringLinkedList::front() const // get front element
{ return head->elem; }
void StringLinkedList::addFront(const string& e) { // add to front of list
StringNode* v = new StringNode; // create new node
v->elem = e; // store data
v->next = head; // head now follows v
head = v; // v is now the head
}
void StringLinkedList::removeFront() { // remove front item
StringNode* old = head; // save current head
head = old->next; // skip over old head
delete old; // delete the old head
}

I tried to look for a duplicate which explains how C++ uses call-by-value.
In C++ a function parameter of type T will make a copy of the object before the function is called.
int myFunction( int value )
{
value = value + 1;
}
int main( int argc, char * argv[] )
{
int elem = 6;
myFunction( elem );
printf( "%d\n", elem ); // elem = 6;
}
In the above example a copy is made of the int value, which is sent to myFunction, and the copy is incremented.
This may not be what is wanted, and we can change the result to 7, by modifying myFunction to take a reference to the value. This is done by using the '&' to describe a reference value.
int myFunction( int & value )
{
value = value + 1;
}
int main( int argc, char * argv[] )
{
int elem = 6;
myFunction( elem );
printf( "%d\n", elem ); // elem = 7;
}
In the above case, no copy is made, and elem gets updated.
There are 2 main reasons you pass references to a function
To allow the value (or object) to be updated.
To avoid the cost of copying the value.
In your quoted example the second case is why the const string & is used (reference to string object). std::string, has costs to construct and destroy, so by sending a reference to avoid this, is more efficient.
To compliment this usage, the reference, is usually made const to convince the compiler that the value should not be changed.

Related

Binary Tree (insert and search within radius)

I am writing a binary tree search program but I'm not sure how to add nodes and search through them. The nodes come from a .txt file that is being read with a different file so just assume that already works.
The text file looks like:
Name Location
Old Building 31.2222
New Building 21.2111
Like I said, the program already reads in the file so that's not an issue. However, I have to insert the name and location into the nodes of the binary tree. Then I have to search everything within a range which is where the plus minus comes from.
Side note: my copy constructor may be incorrect as well though it complies properly.
Thanks for the help!
#ifndef BINTREE_HPP
#define BINTREE_HPP
#include <utility>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
class bintree {
// A binary search tree for locations in Lineland.
// Notes:
// - Assume a flat, one-dimensional world with locations from -180 to 180.
// - All locations and distances are measured in the same units (degrees).
public:
// Default constructor
bintree() {
this->root = NULL;
}
// Copy constructor
bintree(const bintree &t) {
this -> root = NULL;
*this = t;
}
// Destructor
~bintree() {
}
// Copy assignment is implemented using the copy-swap idiom
friend void swap(bintree &t1, bintree &t2) {
using std::swap;
// Swap all data members here, e.g.,
// swap(t1.foo, t2.foo);
// Pointers should be swapped -- but not the things they point to.
}
bintree &operator= (bintree other) {
// You don't need to modify this function.
swap(*this, other);
return *this;
}
void insert(const std::string& name, double p) {
// insert node with name and location (p)
}
void within_radius(double p, double r, std::vector<std::string> &result) const {
// Search for elements within the range `p` plus or minus `r`.
// Clears `result` and puts the elements in `result`.
// Postcondition: `result` contains all (and only) elements of the
// tree, in any order, that lie within the range `p` plus or minus
// `r`.
}
private:
struct node
{
node *left;
node *right;
};
node* root;
};
#endif
First, your nodes need to hold the data:
struct node
{
node *left;
node *right;
std::string name; // This is the key for your reasearch
double p; // followed by other data
};
Then you can think to browsing through your tree to insert a new node.
In this example, I assume that you can insert several nodes with the same name.
void insert(const std::string& name, double p) {
node *n = new node; // create a new node
n->name=name; n->p=p; // intialise the data payload
n->left=n->right=nullptr; // and make it a leaf.
if (root==nullptr) // if tree is empty,
root = n; // add the new node.
else { // else find where to insert it
node* t=root;
while (true) {
if (t->name > n->name) { // go to left
if (t->left==nullptr) {
t->left = n;
break;
}
else t=t->left;
}
else if (t->name == n->name) { // insert between current and next
n->right = t->right;
t->right = n;
break;
}
else { // go to right
if (t->right==nullptr) {
t->right = n;
break;
}
else t=t->right;
}
}
}
}
Here a live demo.
Note that I have only answered your insertion question, you still have to do a lot on your own (operator= and copy constructor need review, a destructor needs to be created, etc...)

Circular double linked list with smart pointers in c++

Is it possible to create a circular doubly-linked list using smart pointers in C++
struct Node {
int val;
shared_ptr<Node> next;
weak_ptr prev;
};
shared_ptr<Node> head;
But this will have a circular reference of shared pointers and thus not deallocate correctly.
Make the circular linked list a class itself (with whatever operations you need to build it, like append). Have its destructor break the link by setting tail->next = nullptr. It should not matter which link you break, so if you're not using a head and tail, just set any one of them nullptr, and you're good.
In my testing, I made a circular linked list, and the nodes did not destruct. Then at the end, I added tail->next = nullptr before it exited, and all the destructors fired correctly.
My original posted answer was rather light on details. This one gives a proper explanation of how you can achieve a circular linked list without a memory leak and still adhere to the Rule of Zero. The answer is basically the same, using a sentinel, but the mechanism is a little more involved than I had originally let on.
The trick is to use a sentinel type that behaves just like a list node, but in fact does not really have a shared pointer to the head of the list. To achieve this, the node class should be separated into a behavior object and a state object.
class NodeState {
std::shared_ptr<Node> next_;
std::weak_ptr<Node> prev_;
int value_;
NodeState (int v) : value_(v) {}
NodeState (std::shared_ptr<Node> p) : next_(p), prev_(p) {}
//...
};
class Node {
virtual ~Node () = default;
virtual NodeState & state () = 0;
std::shared_ptr<Node> & next () { return state().next_; }
std::weak_ptr<Node> & prev () { return state().prev_; }
int & value () { return state().value_; }
void insert (const std::shared_ptr<Node> &p) {
//...
}
};
Now, you can define a node implementation and a sentinel implementation.
class NodeImplementation : public Node {
NodeState state_;
NodeState & state () { return state_; }
NodeImplementation (int v) : state_(v) {}
//...
};
class NodeSentinel : public Node {
List &list_;
NodeSentinel (List &l) : list_(l) {}
NodeState & state () { return list_.sentinel_state_; }
};
The list itself contains a NodeState used by the sentinel object. Upon initialization, the list creates a sentinel object and initializes its state.
class List {
//...
NodeState sentinel_state_;
std::shared_ptr<Node> head () { return sentinel_state_.next_; }
std::shared_ptr<Node> sentinel () {
return std::shared_ptr<Node>(head()->prev());
}
//...
public:
List () : sentinel_state_(std::make_shared<NodeSentinel>(*this)) {}
//...
void push_front (int value) {
head()->insert(std::make_shared<NodeImplementation>(value));
}
void push_back (int value) {
sentinel()->insert(std::make_shared<NodeImplementation>(value));
}
//...
};
So, what does this organization do? It avoids the issue of a circular reference by using a sentinel node to act as the break. While the tail of the list points to the sentinel object, the sentinel object itself does not point to anything. Instead, it uses the state of the list itself to determine its next and previous neighbors.
Thus, the circular shared pointers only persists as long as the list exists. Once the list is destroyed, Item A loses its reference, and via the domino effect, Sentinel itself will be destroyed.
A fundamental point is that the sentinel object itself must never be exposed to the user of the list interface directly. It should remain internal to the list object at all times. It essentially represents end() in an STL like container, and logically, it can never be removed from the list (until the list itself is destroyed). In practice, this means removal operations on the list need to exit early if the passed in iterator represents the sentinel.
Demo
Try It Online
It is also possible to define a member function next() which can select between a shared or weak pointer.
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
using namespace std;
struct T {
int n_;
shared_ptr<T> next_;
weak_ptr<T> weaknext_;
T(shared_ptr<T> next, int n) : next_(next), n_(n) {};
auto next() {
if (next_ == nullptr)
return shared_ptr<T>(weaknext_);
return next_;
}
~T() { cout << n_ << "ok\n"; }
};
int main() {
auto p0 = make_shared<T>(nullptr, 1);
auto p1 = make_shared<T>(p0, 2);
auto p2 = make_shared<T>(p1, 3);
p0->weaknext_ = p2; //makes the list circular
auto p = p2;
for (int i = 0; i < 5; ++i) {
cout << p->n_ << "\n";
p = p->next();
}
}

Searching for a node in a tree structure

I need help finding and returning a "node" in a general tree structure. Each node can have more than 2 children so it's not a binary tree. I've been given the following code, this Element object has a list to contain its children, I create one element node pointer in main and using that I have to add and search for children. This is for a school project but I'm not looking for answers (an answer wouldn't hurt). Any advice on how to go about this problem would be much appreciated, thanks!
#pragma once
#include <iostream>
#include <list>
#include <sstream>
using namespace std;
class Element
{
private:
list<Element*> children;
char* _tag;
int _value;
// private methods
public:
// default constructor
Element();
// non-default constructors
Element( char* name); // value is set to -99 if not given
Element(char* name, char* value);
// destructor, must recursively destruct its children
// and release the memory allocated for _tag
~Element();
// ostream operator ( pre-order traversal)
friend ostream& operator << (ostream& out, const Element& E);
void display_xml(); // print out the tree in xml-- format
void addChild( Element* child); // add a child
// Find the first element such that _tag == tag
// returns “this” pointer of this element
Element* findTag( char* tag);
char* getName();
int getValue();
void setName(char* name);
void setValue( int value);
int height(); //b return the height
int size(); // return the size
// other methods
};
this is my best attempt at a solution, it has obvious problems but I'm new to all of this and some explanation on a proper solution, or some sample code would be very helpful!
Element* Element::findTag(char* tag)
{
list<Element*> temp = children;
int s = temp.size();
if(getName() == tag)
{
return this;
}
else
{
for(int i = 0; i < s; i++)
{
findTag((*temp.front()).getName());
temp.pop_front();
}
}
}
I will give you a pseudo-code for searching for a node that has a value val in a tree rooted at root:
find(Node root, val)
if(root.value == val) return root //-- if the recursion found the node we are searching for
else
for every child x of root //-- re-cursing on the children of root
if(find(x, val) != null) return x //-- if one of the calls found the node we are searching for
return null //-- if we did not find the node we want in the sub-tree rooted at root

C++ linked list implementation

i am working on an assignment where i am asked to implement a linked list in c++. so far everything is working great except for when i am creating a new list. in my method create_list(). after i assign content and an id number to my Field and try to call GetNext() i get an error saying: Request for member 'GetNext()' in 'Node' which is a non-class type '*Field'. I'm still new to the C++ syntax and object oriented programming. What am I doing wrong? I thought by using the line Field *Node = new Field(SIZE, EMPTY); that my variable Node would be of class type Field...?
#include <iostream>
#include <ctype.h>
using namespace std;
typedef enum { EMPTY, OCCUPIED } FIELDTYPE;
// Gameboard Size
int SIZE;
class Field {
private:
int _SquareNum;
FIELDTYPE _Content;
Field* _Next;
public:
// Constructor
Field() { }
// Overload Constructor
Field(int SquareNum, FIELDTYPE Entry) { _SquareNum = SquareNum; _Content = Entry; }
// Get the next node in the linked list
Field* GetNext() { return _Next; }
// Set the next node in the linked list
void SetNext(Field *Next) { _Next = Next; }
// Get the content within the linked list
FIELDTYPE GetContent() { return _Content; }
// Set the content in the linked list
void SetContent(FIELDTYPE Content) { _Content = Content; }
// Get square / location
int GetLocation() { return _SquareNum; }
// Print the content
void Print() {
switch (_Content) {
case OCCUPIED:
cout << "Field " << _SquareNum << ":\tOccupied\n";
break;
default:
cout << "Field " << _SquareNum << ":\tEmpty\n";
break;
}
}
}*Gameboard;
here is my create_list() method:
void create_list()
{
int Element;
cout << "Enter the size of the board: ";
cin >> SIZE;
for(Element = SIZE; Element > 0; Element--){
Field *Node = new Field(SIZE, EMPTY);
Node.GetNext() = Gameboard; // line where the error is
Gameboard = Node;
}
}
. is used for addressing members in objects and references to objects. Node, however, is a pointer to an object. So you need to turn it into a reference before you can use it with .. This means doing (*Node).GetNext(). Or you can use the shorthand: Node->GetNext() - these two are exactly equivalent.
A good mnemonic to use is that you use the pointy operator with pointers :)
No in the declaration
Field *Node = new Field(SIZE, EMPTY);
Node is of type pointer to Field.
The fix is simple if you have a pointer to a class and you want to access a member of that class use ->.
Node->GetNext() = Gameboard;
I think your code has other errors, and I don't think that even with this 'fix' it's going to work. Probably what you really want is
Node->SetNext(Gameboard);
You're calling Node.GetNext(), but Node is a pointer. You need to use the -> operator instead of the . operator, as in Node->GetNext().
The function must returns a reference value if you want to set as a l-value.
You code need some changes:
// Get the next node in the linked list
Field& GetNext() { return *_Next; }
then you can use the function as a l-value
Node->GetNext() = *Gameboard;

Pointers - passing ptr to a ptr or passing address of a ptr

I am trying to remove the left child (10) of a sample binary search tree using two methods:
Method1: By passing pointer to a pointer to the current node.
Method2: By passing address of the pointer to the current node. This does not removes the node, but calling delete corrupts the pointer arrangement, causing a crash while printing the nodes.
The tree looks like this and I am trying to delete 10 and replace it with 5
20
|
10--|---30
|
5---|
I have some understanding of pointers. But still, I am not clear with this behavior of pointers.
#include <iostream>
class Node
{
public:
Node(int key) : leftChild(0), rightChild(0), m_key (key){}
~Node(){}
Node *leftChild;
Node *rightChild;
int m_key;
};
Node* build1234(int, int, int, int);
void print(Node *);
void print1234(Node *);
void removeLeft(Node **nodePtr)
{
Node *oldPtr = *nodePtr;
if(*nodePtr)
{
*nodePtr = (*nodePtr)->leftChild;
delete oldPtr;
}
}
int main()
{
Node *demo1 = build1234(10, 20, 30, 5);
Node *demo2 = build1234(10, 20, 30, 5);
print1234(demo1);
print1234(demo2);
//Method1 - 10 is correctly removed with 5
Node **nodePtr = &demo1;
nodePtr = &(*nodePtr)->leftChild;
removeLeft(nodePtr);
print1234(demo1);
//Method2 - 10 is not removed
Node *node = demo2;
node = node->leftChild;
removeLeft(&node);
print1234(demo2);
return 0;
}
Node* build1234(int B, int A, int C, int D)
{
Node *root = new Node(A);
root->leftChild = new Node(B);
root->rightChild = new Node(C);
root->leftChild->leftChild = new Node(D);
return root;
}
void print(Node *node)
{
if(node)
{
print(node->leftChild);
std::cout << "[" << node->m_key << "]";
print(node->rightChild);
}
}
void print1234(Node *node)
{
std::cout << std::endl;
print(node);
}
Note: This question is not about BST, but pointers. If you see the two calls to removeLeft(nodePtr) and the removeLeft(&node) in the main() function.
How are these two different?
Why the second method fails to achieve the desired result?
In the first case, you are passing an address of a pointer that exists in the tree, so you are modifying the contents of the tree directly.
In the second case, you are passing an address of a variable that is local to main() instead. The tree is not modified, and deleting from the address is accessing stack memory, which is why it crashes
You're overthinking it. All you need is a function removeLeft(Node*) that unhooks the left node and deletes it, recursively:
void removeLeft(Node * p)
{
removeBoth(p->leftChild); // recurse, OK if null
delete p->leftChild; // OK if already null
p->leftChild = 0; // necessary to make recursion terminate
}
void removeBoth(Node * p)
{
if (!p) return;
removeLeft(p);
removeRight(p);
}
If you are bad with pointers consider using smart pointers.
When using smart pointers use shared_ptr<Node> instead of Node * and make_shared(new Node); instead of new Node and remove all deletes. now you can handle pointers without caring for deletes and memory corruption.