I need help with passing a function pointer on C++. I can't linkage one function for a class to other function. I will explain. Anyway I will put a code resume of my program, it is much larger than the code expose here but for more easier I put only the part I need to it works fine.
I have one class (MainSystem) and inside I have an object pointer to the other class (ComCamera). The last class is a SocketServer, and I want when the socket received any data, it sends to the linkage function to MainSystem.
ComCamera is a resource Shared with more class and I need to associate the functions ComCamera::vRecvData to a MainSystem::vRecvData or other function of other class for the call when receive data and send de data to the function class associate.
Can Anyone help to me?
EDDITED - SOLUTION BELOW
main.cpp
#include <iostream>
#include <thread>
#include <string>
#include <vector>
#include <cmath>
#include <string.h>
#include <stdio.h>
#include <exception>
#include <unistd.h>
using std::string;
class ComCamera {
public:
std::function<void(int, std::string)> vRecvData;
void vLinkRecvFunction(std::function<void(int, std::string)> vCallBack) {
this->vRecvData = vCallBack;
}
void vCallFromCamera() {
this->vRecvData(4, "Example");
};
};
class MainSystem {
private:
ComCamera *xComCamera;
public:
MainSystem(ComCamera *xComCamera) {
this->xComCamera = xComCamera;
this->xComCamera->vLinkRecvFunction([this](int iChannelNumber, std::string sData) {vRecvData(iChannelNumber, sData); });
}
void vRecvData(int iNumber, string sData) {
std::cout << "RECV Data From Camera(" + std::to_string(iNumber) + "): " << sData << std::endl;
};
};
int main(void) {
ComCamera xComCamera;
MainSystem xMainSystem(&xComCamera);
xComCamera.vCallFromCamera();
return 0;
}
Output will be:
MainSystem RECV Data From Camera(4): Example
You can have ComCamera::vRecvData be of type std::function<void(int, std::string)> and then have ComCamera::vLinkRecvFunction() be like this:
void ComCamera::vLinkRecvFunction(std::function<void(int, std::string)> callBack)
{
this->vRecvData = callBack;
}
and have MainSystem constructor be like this:
MainSystem::MainSystem(ComCamera *xComCamera)
{
using namespace std::placeholders;
this->xComCamera = xComCamera;
this->xComCamera->vLinkRecvFunction([this](int iNumber, std::string sData){vRecvData(number, sData);});
}
Still though the original question has way too much code to go through friend.
Here what you want :
#include<iostream>
using std::cout;
class A; //forward declare A
class B{
public:
void (A::*ptr)(int x); //Only declare the pointer because A is not yet defined.
};
class A{
public:
void increase_by(int x){
a+=x;
} // this function will be pointed by B's ptr
int a = 0; // assume some data in a;
B b; // creating B inside of A;
void analyze(int y){
(*this.*(b.ptr))(y);
} // Some function that analyzes the data of A or B; Here this just increments A::a through B's ptr
};
int main(){
A a; // creates A
cout<<a.a<<"\n"; // shows initial value of a
a.b.ptr = &A::increase_by; // defines the ptr that lies inside of b which inturns lies inside a
a.analyze(3); // calls the initialize method
(a.*(a.b.ptr))(3); // directly calls b.ptr to change a.a
cout<<a.a; // shows the value after analyzing
return 0;
}
Output will be :
0
6
I still don't get why would you do something like this. But maybe this is what you wanted as per your comments.
To know more read this wonderful PDF.
Related
I am trying to do something I thought was simple: calling functions that call functions that call functions (from inherited classes) using a chain of pointers. Is there a better way of accomplishing this? Also, in the spirit of C++11, how would I incorporate smart pointers in this example? This example crashes the application:
Here is the sample code, apologies if it looks a little silly:
Actual output (Crashes!):
almost there...
Desired output:
almost there...
hello from function1
f1.h:
#ifndef FUNCTION_1_H
#define FUNCTION_1_H
//f1.h (header file)
#include <iostream>
struct f1{
int _a;
f1() {}
void function1();
};
#endif
f2.h:
#ifndef FUNCTION_2_H
#define FUNCTION_2_H
//f2.h (header file)
#include "f1.h"
struct f2 : public f1{
int _b;
f1* f1_ptr;
f2() :f1(){}
void function2();
};
#endif
f3.h:
#ifndef FUNCTION_3_H
#define FUNCTION_3_H
#include "f2.h"
struct f3 :public f2{
int _c;
f2* f2_ptr;
f3() : f2(){}
void function3();
};
#endif
CPPs:
f3.cpp:
#include "f3.h"
void f3::function3(){
//do stuff...
//e.g. calculate an int Var3
f2_ptr->function2(/*pass Var3 as argument*/);
}
f2.cpp:
#include "f2.h"
void f2::function2(/*receive Var3*/){
//do stuff with Var3
//e.g. maybe use Var3 to calculate an int Var2
std::cout << "almost there..." << std::endl;
f1_ptr->function1(/*pass Var2 as argument*/);
}
f1.cpp:
#include "f1.h"
void f1::function1(/*receive Var2*/){
//take Var2 and use elsewhere
//or continue linking to other functions
std::cout << "hello from function1" << std::endl;
}
main.cpp:
int main(){
f3* ptr3 = new f3;
ptr3->function3();
//delete ptr3;
std::cin.get();
return 0;
}
The problem is that in the upper classes, the pointers f2* and f1* are not initialized, so when you do f2_ptr->function2(), you are trying to access a member function via an uninitialized pointer, which leads to UB (undefined behaviour). Your code is doing basically this:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
struct Base
{
void f(){cout << "In f" << endl;}
};
struct Derived
{
Base* ptr;
};
int main()
{
Derived* foo;
foo->ptr->f(); //cannot use foo->ptr, it is not initialized
}
So you have to make sure that in the constructors of f3 you initialize the f2_ptr and so on. About smart pointers, you can use std::unique_ptr or std::shared_ptr, the syntax is std::unique_ptr<Foo> pointer( new Foo ) (and similarly for std::shared). It is highly recommended to use them, for example, you HAVE TO initialize them (cannot arrived at this problem if you'd have used smart pointers)
Here is a hint for how to write f3.cpp:
#include "f3.h"
// define the constructor here (and just declare it in the header `f3.h`)
f3::f3() : f2()
{
auto f2_ptr = std::make_shared<f2>();
// and all our nightmares are over, f2_ptr is now a valid pointer
// which will automatically release the allocated memory
// when the reference count is zero
}
void f3::function3()
{
//do stuff...
//e.g. calculate an int Var3
f2_ptr->function2(/*pass Var3 as argument*/);
}
And since I started this, here is a full C++11 example (it uses in-class initialization) with chaining and that uses smart pointers, which works and is basically equivalent to yours:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
using namespace std;
struct Base
{
void f_base()
{
cout << "In f_base" << endl;
}
};
struct Derived
{
void f_derived()
{
cout << "In f_derived" << endl;
}
std::shared_ptr<Base> ptrBase = make_shared<Base>();
};
struct DerivedDerived
{
std::shared_ptr<Derived> ptrDerived = make_shared<Derived>();
};
int main()
{
DerivedDerived *foo = new DerivedDerived;
foo->ptrDerived->ptrBase->f_base(); // OK now
}
PS: this may help you understand what's going on
When does invoking a member function on a null instance result in undefined behavior?
Before I present the code which is found at the bottom of this post I would like to talk about the issue and the fix's that I do not desire. Okay basically I've created a GUI from scratch sort of and one requirement I wanted for this was allow components to have their own click executions so if i click a button or tab etc.. It would call Component->Execute(); Well normally you would do something like a switch statement of ids and if that components ID equaled n number then it would perform this action. Well that seemed kinda dumb to me and I thought there has to be a better way. I eventually tried to incorporate a feature in JAVA where you would do like Component.AddActionListener(new ActionListener( public void execute(ActionEvent ae) { })); or something like that and I thought that this feature has to be possible in C++. I eventually came across storing void functions into a variable in which could be executed at any time and modified at any time. However I hadn't noticed an issue and that was this only worked with static functions. So below you'll see my problem. I've patched the problem by using a pointer to SomeClass however this would mean having an individual function call for every class type is there no way to store a function callback to a non-static class member without doing the below strategy? and instead doing a strategy like the commented out code?
//Main.cpp
#include <iostream> //system requires this.
#include "SomeClass.h"
void DoSomething1(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Static DoSomething1\n";
}
void DoSomething2(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Static DoSomething2\n";
}
int main()
{
void (*function_call2)(SomeClass*);
void (*function_call)() = DoSomething1; //This works No Problems!
function_call(); //Will Call the DoSomething1(void);
function_call = DoSomething2; //This works No Problems!
function_call(); //Will Call the DoSomething2(void);
SomeClass *some = new SomeClass(); //Create a SomeClass pointer;
function_call = SomeClass::DoSomething3; //Static SomeClass::DoSomething3();
function_call(); //Will Call the SomeClass::DoSomething3(void);
//function_call = some->DoSomething4; //Non-Static SomeClass::DoSomething4 gives an error.
//function_call(); //Not used because of error above.
function_call2 = SomeClass::DoSomething5; //Store the SomeClass::DoSomething(SomeClass* some);
function_call2(some); //Call out SomeClass::DoSomething5 which calls on SomeClass::DoSomething4's non static member.
system("pause");
return 0;
}
//SomeClass.hpp
#pragma once
#include <iostream>
class SomeClass
{
public:
SomeClass();
~SomeClass();
public:
static void DoSomething3(void);
void DoSomething4(void);
static void DoSomething5(SomeClass* some);
};
//SomeClass.cpp
#include "SomeClass.h"
SomeClass::SomeClass(void)
{
}
SomeClass::~SomeClass(void)
{
}
void SomeClass::DoSomething3(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Static DoSomething3\n";
}
void SomeClass::DoSomething4(void)
{
std::cout << "We Called Non-Static DoSomething4\n";
}
void SomeClass::DoSomething5(SomeClass *some)
{
some->DoSomething4();
}
Secondary Fix for what I'll do not an exact answer I wanted but it meets my needs for now along with allowing additional features which would have become overly complicate had this not existed.
//Component.hpp
#pragma once
#include <iostream>
#include <windows.h>
#include <d3dx9.h>
#include <d3d9.h>
#include "Constants.hpp"
#include "ScreenState.hpp"
#include "ComponentType.hpp"
using namespace std;
class Component
{
static void EMPTY(void) { }
static void EMPTY(int i) { }
public:
Component(void)
{
callback = EMPTY;
callback2 = EMPTY;
callback_id = -1;
}
Component* SetFunction(void (*callback)())
{
this->callback = callback;
return this;
}
Component* SetFunction(void (*callback2)(int), int id)
{
this->callback_id = id;
this->callback2 = callback2;
return this;
}
void execute(void)
{
callback();
callback2(callback_id);
}
}
The syntax for pointers-to-member-functions is as follows:
struct Foo
{
void bar(int, int);
void zip(int, int);
};
Foo x;
void (Foo::*p)(int, int) = &Foo::bar; // pointer
(x.*p)(1, 2); // invocation
p = &Foo::zip;
(x.*p)(3, 4); // invocation
Mind the additional parentheses in the function invocation, which is needed to get the correct operator precedence. The member-dereference operator is .* (and there's also ->* from an instance pointer).
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B
{
public:
int getMsg(int i)
{
return i + 1;
}
};
class A
{
B b;
public:
void run()
{
taunt(b.getMsg);
}
void taunt(int (*msg)(int))
{
cout << (*msg)(1) << endl;
}
};
int main()
{
A a;
a.run();
}
The above code has a class B inside a class A, and class A has a method taunt that takes a function as an argument. class B's getMsg is passed into taunt...The above code generated the following error message: "error: no matching function for call to 'A::taunt()'"
What's causing the error message in the above code? Am I missing something?
Update:
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
class B
{
public:
int getMsg(int i)
{
return i + 1;
}
};
class A
{
B b;
public:
void run()
{
taunt(b.getMsg);
}
void taunt(int (B::*msg)(int))
{
cout << (*msg)(1) << endl;
}
};
int main()
{
A a;
a.run();
}
t.cpp: In member function 'void A::run()':
Line 19: error: no matching function for call to 'A::taunt()'
compilation terminated due to -Wfatal-errors.
I'm still getting the same error after changing (*msg)(int) to (B::*msg)(int)
b.getMsg is not the correct way to form a pointer to member, you need &B::getMsg.
(*msg)(1) is not the correct way to call a function through a pointer to member you need to specify an object to call the function on, e.g. (using a temporary) (B().*msg)(1).
The right way to do such things in OOP is to use interfaces so all you need to do is to define an interface and implement it in B class after that pass the pointer of instance which implements this interface to your method in class A.
class IB{
public:
virtual void doSomething()=0;
};
class B: public IB{
public:
virtual void doSomething(){...}
};
class A{
public:
void doSomethingWithB(IB* b){b->doSomething();}
};
This works in VS 2010. The output is the same on all lines:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
#include <functional>
using namespace std;
using namespace std::placeholders;
class A
{
public:
int foo(int a, float b)
{
return int(a*b);
}
};
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
A temp;
int x = 5;
float y = 3.5;
auto a = std::mem_fn(&A::foo);
cout << a(&temp, x, y) << endl;
auto b = std::bind(a, &temp, x, y);
cout << b() << endl;
auto c = std::bind(std::mem_fn(&A::foo), &temp, _1, y);
cout << c(5) << endl;
}
Basically, you use std::mem_fn to get your callable object for the member function, and then std::bind if you want to bind additional parameters, including the object pointer itself. I'm pretty sure there's a way to use std::ref to encapsulate a reference to the object too if you'd prefer that. I also included the _1 forwarding marker just for another way to specify some parameters in the bind, but not others. You could even specify everything BUT the class instance if you wanted the same parameters to everything but have it work on different objects. Up to you.
If you'd rather use boost::bind it recognizes member functions and you can just put it all on one line a bit to be a bit shorter: auto e = boost::bind(&A::foo, &temp, x, y) but obviously it's not much more to use completely std C++11 calls either.
I am using inheritance for my code. ChangeRequest is my base class. The code is as follows.
ChangeRequest.h
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
using namespace std;
class ChangeRequest
{
int swapDay;
int newDay;
public:
void setSwapDay(int newDay);
int getSwapDay();
void setNewDay(int newDay);
int getNewDay();
};
ChangeRequest.cpp
#include "ChangeDutyRequest.h"
void ChangeRequest::setSwapDay(int newDay)
{
swapDay = newDay;
}
int ChangeRequest::getSwapDay()
{
return swapDay;
}
void ChangeRequest::setNewDay(int day)
{
newDay = day;
}
int ChangeRequest::getNewDay()
{
return newDay;
}
The code below is for the derived class. SwapDuty
SwapDuty.h
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
#include "ChangeRequest.h"
using namespace std;
class SwapDuty: public ChangeRequest
{
string requester;
public:
void setRequester(string member);
string getRequester();
};
SwapDuty.cpp
#include "SwapDuty.h"
void SwapDuty::setRequester(string member)
{
requester = member;
}
string SwapDuty::getRequester()
{
return requester;
}
when I compile and access the requester attribute using getRequester(). I get the following error.
'class ChangeRequest' has no member named 'getRequester'
This is how I used my code
Can someone please tell me what I am doing wrong? Thanks in advance
SwapDuty newSwapDutyRequest;
for(int i = 0; i < tempList.size(); i++ )
{
if(tempList[i].getPersonToPerform().getName() == loginMember)
{
newSwapDutyRequest.setRequester(loginMember);
newSwapDutyRequest.setSwapDay(swapDay);
newSwapDutyRequest.setNewDutyDay(daySwapWith);
break;
}
}
changeList.push_back(newSwapDutyRequest);
cout << changeList[1].getRequester() << endl;
What is type of changeList?
Although you have created an object of the derived class, I suspect that you are pushing it into the container of the base class. Possibly you are getting few warnings before this error as well, because of pushing derived object into the container of type base.
If you want to make a container of base class and push in the derived class objects you need to work with the pointers to the objects not the objects themselves.
Where is your class ChangeDutyRequest? You don't show it. Maybe you forgot to inherit it from the correct base or invoke it incorrectly?
Show fuller code sample
#include <boost/bind.hpp>
#include <iostream>
using namespace std;
using boost::bind;
class A {
public:
void print(string &s) {
cout << s.c_str() << endl;
}
};
typedef void (*callback)();
class B {
public:
void set_callback(callback cb) {
m_cb = cb;
}
void do_callback() {
m_cb();
}
private:
callback m_cb;
};
void main() {
A a;
B b;
string s("message");
b.set_callback(bind(A::print, &a, s));
b.do_callback();
}
So what I'm trying to do is to have the print method of A stream "message" to cout when b's callback is activated. I'm getting an unexpected number of arguments error from msvc10. I'm sure this is super noob basic and I'm sorry in advance.
replace typedef void (*callback)(); with typedef boost::function<void()> callback;
A bound function doesn't produce an ordinary function, so you cannot just store it in a regular function pointer. However, boost::function is able to handle anything as long as it is callable with the correct signature, so that's what you want. It will work with a function pointer, or a functor created with bind.
After a few corrections to your code, I came up with this:
#include <boost/bind.hpp>
#include <boost/function.hpp>
#include <iostream>
// i prefer explicit namespaces, but that's a matter of preference
class A {
public:
// prefer const refs to regular refs unless you need to modify the argument!
void print(const std::string &s) {
// no need for .c_str() here, cout knows how to output a std::string just fine :-)
std::cout << s << std::endl;
}
};
// holds any arity 0 callable "thing" which returns void
typedef boost::function<void()> callback;
class B {
public:
void set_callback(callback cb) {
m_cb = cb;
}
void do_callback() {
m_cb();
}
private:
callback m_cb;
};
void regular_function() {
std::cout << "regular!" << std::endl;
}
// the return type for main is int, never anything else
// however, in c++, you may omit the "return 0;" from main (and only main)
// which will have the same effect as if you had a "return 0;" as the last line
// of main
int main() {
A a;
B b;
std::string s("message");
// you forget the "&" here before A::print!
b.set_callback(boost::bind(&A::print, &a, s));
b.do_callback();
// this will work for regular function pointers too, yay!
b.set_callback(regular_function);
b.do_callback();
}