I am trying to allow a child class to define the variadic function specialization. For example:
#include <iostream>
#include <vector>
#include <memory>
class BaseClass
{
public:
BaseClass() {};
virtual ~BaseClass() {};
template<typename GenericData>
void ReceiveData(GenericData &inData)
{
throw std::runtime_error("Undefined");
}
};
class ReceiveInt : public BaseClass
{
void ReceiveData(int & inData)
{
std::cout << "I know what to do!";
}
};
int main(int argc, char* argv[])
{
std::vector<std::shared_ptr<BaseClass>> classHolder;
classHolder.push_back(std::make_shared<ReceiveInt>());
int test = 1;
classHolder.front()->ReceiveData(test);
return 0;
}
But unfortunately this does not work, as the BaseClass ReceiveData function is called. Is this even possible?
EDIT 1
As people have pointed out, I'm very wrong with my notation. Looks like I learned more than I expected today.
Is this even possible?
I don't think so.
Dynamic dispatch is possible only for virtual member functions.
Member function templates may not be virtual.
If you can use regular member functions, i.e. not member function templates, then you can make them virtual. That will work.
You confuse some notions here.
To start with, there are no variadic templates here as ReceiveData function below:
template<typename GenericData>
void ReceiveData(GenericData &inData)
{
throw std::runtime_error("Undefined");
}
is a template member function.
Then, if you want to override a method in the derived class, the right way is to use virtual functions, probably a pure virtual function in the base class and a virtual function with an override specifier in the derived class.
However, virtual functions limit you to a a set of fixed types because there are no template virtual functions. You could experiment with CRTP though:
template<typename T>
class Base {
public:
void receiveData(const T&) {}
};
class ReceiveInt : public Base<int> {};
which emulates a sort of static polymorphism. Below:
ReceiveInt{}.receiveData(int{});
receiveData from the base class instantiated with int.
I think you may be confusing your terminology. BaseClass::ReceiveData is a templated method, taking a template parameter GenericData. A variadic function takes a number of arguments determined at runtime.
In ReceiveInt, you're not making a specialization of anything, because ReceiveInt::ReceiveData is not a templated method. In fact, even if it was templated, it would not be possible to call in your example. How would a pointer to BaseClass know how to call a template specialization in the derived class it points to?
You can make BaseClass::ReceiveData virtual. This allows you to override it in a base class, and still call it with a pointer to BaseClass. Unfortunately, templates are a compile time language feature, whereas dynamic dispatch is a runtime feature -- in this context, you can't have both.
References
Variadic Functions
Template Specialization
Why do we need virtual functions in C++?
You would have to cast to the derived type first, it is not possible using a base class pointer/reference as the base class will only know about its own implementation. This is not even a case where you can use a recursive dependency on the derived type as the derived type is not defined yet at the point the base is being instantiated.
If you do cast to the derived type then it would be able to resolve the derived member as you desire.
There is no variadic templates in your code like already explained by the others.
But you can use the fact that the templated class methods are instantiated at the first time invoked. But there is no virtual overriding here.
In this example you can define the different implementations of the method templates in Base and Derived classes, but you have explicitely tell the compiler which one to use.
It's not possible to use Derived class method through a Base class pointer without explicit cast:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
using namespace std;
class Base
{
public:
Base() {};
virtual ~Base() {};
template<typename T>
void ReceiveData(T)
{
throw std::runtime_error("Undefined");
}
};
class Derived : public Base
{
public:
template<typename... Args >
void ReceiveData(Args... args)
{
(void)std::initializer_list<int>{(std::cout << args << std::endl, 0)...};
}
};
int main()
{
Base b;
// b.ReceiveData(1); //-> this calls base class method
Derived d;
d.ReceiveData(1); // this calls the method in the derived class
d.ReceiveData(2, "hello"); // this calls the method in the derived class
Base* b2 = new Derived();
// b2->ReceiveData(3); // this will instantiate and call the base class method
// thus raising an exception
// because no virtual overriding of templated methods
((Derived*)b2)->ReceiveData("world",1); // this will instantiate and call the derived class
// method, then because of explicit casting the
// compiler knows which class to target
return 0;
}
Live demo: https://wandbox.org/permlink/K0qEAC7C7yzg6gYL
Related
I want to extend my base class by adding some possible postprocessing or preprocessing in some important util functions, and at the same time, I want to ensure that, calls to base class member function invokes the overridden functions of the most derived class.
These two ideas are what I'm considering of;
Add preprocess() and postprocess() of derived class
void func() {
derived().func_pre();
// do the job of the base class
derived().func_post();
}
Truly awful, all derived class should implement func_pre() and func_post() even if they don't need.
Call derived().func() from func()
Base class:
void func() {
derived().func()
}
void func_impl() {
// do the job of the base class
}
Derived class:
void func() {
preprocess();
base().func_impl();
postprocess();
}
Better than idea 1, but func() will be ill-formed if there is no CRTP derived class.
Better ideas?
So I recently accidentally called some virtual functions from the constructor of a base class, i.e. Calling virtual functions inside constructors.
I realise that I should not do this because overrides of the virtual function will not be called, but how can I achieve some similar functionality? My use-case is that I want a particular function to be run whenever an object is constructed, and I don't want people who write derived classes to have to worry about what this is doing (because of course they could call this thing in their derived class constructor). But, the function that needs to be called in-turn happens to call a virtual function, which I want to allow the derived class the ability to override if they want.
But because a virtual function gets called, I can't just stick this function in the constructor of the base class and have it get run automatically that way. So I seem to be stuck.
Is there some other way to achieve what I want?
edit: I happen to be using the CRTP to access other methods in the derived class from the base class, can I perhaps use that instead of virtual functions in the constructor? Or is much the same issue present then? I guess perhaps it can work if the function being called is static?
edit2: Also just found this similar question: Call virtual method immediately after construction
If really needed, and you have access to the factory.
You may do something like:
template <typename Derived, typename ... Args>
std::unique_ptr<Derived> Make(Args&&... args)
{
auto derived = std::make_unique<Derived>(std::forward<Args>(args));
derived->init(); // virtual call
return derived;
}
There is no simple way to do this. One option would be to use so-called virtual constructor idiom, hide all constructors of the base class, and instead expose static 'create' - which will dynamically create an object, call your virtual override on it and return (smart)pointer.
This is ugly, and what is more important, constrains you to dynamically created objects, which is not the best thing.
However, the best solution is to use as little of OOP as possible. C++ strength (contrary to popular belief) is in it's non-OOP specific traits. Think about it - the only family of polymorphic classess inside standard library are streams, which everybody hate (because they are polymorphic!)
I want a particular function to be run whenever an object is constructed, [... it] in-turn happens to call a virtual function, which I want to allow the derived class the ability to override if they want.
This can be easily done if you're willing to live with two restrictions:
the constructors in the entire class hierarchy must be non-public, and thus
a factory template class must be used to construct the derived class.
Here, the "particular function" is Base::check, and the virtual function is Base::method.
First, we establish the base class. It has to fulfill only two requirements:
It must befriend MakeBase, its checker class. I assume that you want the Base::check method to be private and only usable by the factory. If it's public, you won't need MakeBase, of course.
The constructor must be protected.
https://github.com/KubaO/stackoverflown/tree/master/questions/imbue-constructor-35658459
#include <iostream>
#include <utility>
#include <type_traits>
using namespace std;
class Base {
friend class MakeBase;
void check() {
cout << "check()" << endl;
method();
}
protected:
Base() { cout << "Base()" << endl; }
public:
virtual ~Base() {}
virtual void method() {}
};
The templated CRTP factory derives from a base class that's friends with Base and thus has access to the private checker method; it also has access to the protected constructors in order to construct any of the derived classes.
class MakeBase {
protected:
static void check(Base * b) { b->check(); }
};
The factory class can issue a readable compile-time error message if you inadvertently use it on a class not derived from Base:
template <class C> class Make : public C, MakeBase {
public:
template <typename... Args> Make(Args&&... args) : C(std::forward<Args>(args)...) {
static_assert(std::is_base_of<Base, C>::value,
"Make requires a class derived from Base");
check(this);
}
};
The derived classes must have a protected constructor:
class Derived : public Base {
int a;
protected:
Derived(int a) : a(a) { cout << "Derived() " << endl; }
void method() override { cout << ">" << a << "<" << endl; }
};
int main()
{
Make<Derived> d(3);
}
Output:
Base()
Derived()
check()
>3<
If you take a look at how others solved this problem, you will notice that they simply transferred the responsibility of calling the initialization function to client. Take MFC’s CWnd, for instance: you have the constructor and you have Create, a virtual function that you must call to have a proper CWnd instantiation: “these are my rules: construct, then initialize; obey, or you’ll get in trouble”.
Yes, it is error prone, but it is better than the alternative: “It has been suggested that this rule is an implementation artifact. It is not so. In fact, it would be noticeably easier to implement the unsafe rule of calling virtual functions from constructors exactly as from other functions. However, that would imply that no virtual function could be written to rely on invariants established by base classes. That would be a terrible mess.” - Stroustrup. What he meant, I reckon, is that it would be easier to set the virtual table pointer to point to the VT of derived class instead of keep changing it to the VT of current class as your constructor call goes from base down.
I realise that I should not do this because overrides of the virtual function will not be called,...
Assuming that the call to a virtual function would work the way you want, you shouldn't do this because of the invariants.
class B // written by you
{
public:
B() { f(); }
virtual void f() {}
};
class D : public B // written by client
{
int* p;
public:
D() : p( new int ) {}
void f() override { *p = 10; } // relies on correct initialization of p
};
int main()
{
D d;
return 0;
}
What if it would be possible to call D::f from B via VT of D? You will use an uninitialized pointer, which will most likely result in a crash.
...but how can I achieve some similar functionality?
If you are willing to break the rules, I guess that it might be possible to get the address of desired virtual table and call the virtual function from constructor.
Seems you want this, or need more details.
class B
{
void templateMethod()
{
foo();
bar();
}
virtual void foo() = 0;
virtual void bar() = 0;
};
class D : public B
{
public:
D()
{
templateMethod();
}
virtual void foo()
{
cout << "D::foo()";
}
virtual void bar()
{
cout << "D::bar()";
}
};
#include <memory>
class Base
{
std::shared_ptr<Base> create() const; // Returns a default constructed object
}
Suppose, that all the members derived to whatever degree from Base are copy constructible and default constructible. I want the
std::shared_ptr<Base> create() const;
Method to create object of the appropriate dynamic type, but I do not want to use boilerplate code.
Is it possible to make
std::shared_ptr<Base> create() const;
Statically bound, but inside find somehow the correct type and create the object using Default constructor? Possibly using C++11.
The create() functions should probably be static, as you don't have an instance yet. But without parameters you cannot do what you want... unless you use templates, of course:
class Base
{
public:
template<typename T>
static std::shared_ptr<Base> create() const
{
return std::shared<Base>(new T);
}
};
Then use it this way:
std::shared_ptr<Base> ptr(Base::create<Foo>());
Or, if you prefer:
std::shared_ptr<Base> ptr(Foo::create<Foo>());
Ideally you have a static and perhaps a non-static create() functions. There is a clever way to accomplish this.
Define a SuperBase class. It needs a virtual destructor and a pure virtual create() function. You'll use pointers/references to this class for normal late-binding OOP behaviours.
Define a Base class template that inherits from SuperBase. Base's template parameter will be the type of the Derived class. Base will also have a traits class template with a static function called create(). This static create() function will create a default object with new. Using the trait's create() function, Base will define both a static_create() and the pure virtual SuperBase::create() functions.
Implement Derived by inheriting from Base<Derived>.
One this is done, if you know you are using a derived type, then you can write Derived::create() to statically create a new one. If not, then you can always use an instance's create() method. Polymorphism is not broken since SuperBase would have the polymorphic interface you need/want --Base<D> is simply a helper class that auto defines the static_create() and create() functions so you would not normally use Base<D> directly.
Sample code appears below:
#include <memory>
#include <iostream>
class SuperBase
{
public:
virtual ~SuperBase() = default;
virtual std::shared_ptr<SuperBase> create() const = 0;
};
template <typename T>
struct Base_Traits
{
static T* create()
{
return new T;
}
};
template <typename Derived, typename Traits=Base_Traits<Derived>>
class Base : public SuperBase
{
public:
// Define a static factory function...
static std::shared_ptr<SuperBase> static_create()
{
return std::shared_ptr<SuperBase>{Traits::create()};
}
// Define pure virtual implementation...
std::shared_ptr<SuperBase> create() const override
{
return static_create();
}
};
class Derived : public Base<Derived>
{
};
int main()
{
auto newone = Derived::static_create(); // Type known # compile time
auto anotherone = newone->create(); // Late binding; type not known # compile time
}
Is there a way you can invoke a member function of a base class upon a class derived from it?
Class Bass{
public:
void func();
};
Class Derived: public Base{
public:
void func();
};
I have a practice midterm, and I suspect no, because how would the Base class know about the Derived, but I am not sure.
Is there a way you can invoke a member function of a base class upon a class derived from it?
Not sure exactly what you mean by this, but given your Base and Derived classes you can do the following. Just make sure you use a reference or pointer, not pass-by-value because of the slicing problem.
Call Base::func() from within Derived::func():
void Derived::func()
{
Base::func();
}
Call Base::func() explicitly on a Derived object:
Derived d;
d.Base::func();
I [...] am wondering if you could do something like Base::func(Derived d)
As others have pointed out, you can do this using a forward declaration:
// Tell the compiler "Derived" is a class name.
class Derived;
class Base
{
// Can use the class name since it has been declared.
void func(Derived& derived);
};
// Define the class named "Derived".
class Derived : public Base
{
// ...
};
// Use the derived class.
void Base::func(Derived& derived)
{
// For this bit to work, the definition of `Derived` must
// be visible at this point (like putting the class above
// or including your "Derived.h" from "Base.cpp").
derived.some_derived_method();
}
However, you won't be able to define the Base::func(Derived&) directly in the class definition since you need to finished defining Base and to define Derived first.
if I understand correctly, you need to call base function with derived parameter?
You can do it only using forward declaration and passing derived object by pointer or ref.
class Derived;
class Base{
public:
void func(Derived&);
};
You should be able to do something like this:
class Derived;
class Base {
public:
void func();
void func(Derived);
};
class Derived : public Base {
public:
void func();
};
void
Base::func(Derived D) {
}
It is okay to use incomplete types in the Base's member function declarations, but you must provide the complete type before their definition.
You can use forward declaration of Derived class:
class Derived;
First of all, do you mean methods on an object, or static class methods?
Secondly, the answer is: it depends what the object you're invoking the method call on is. This is the nature of polymorphism: if your object is of type 'Derived', then even if it has been cast to a 'Base' the method call will still invoke the Derived version of func.
Is that what you were asking?
It must be something specific in my code, which I can't post. But maybe someone can suggest possible causes.
Basically I have:
class CParent
{
public:
void doIt(int x);
};
class CChild : public CParent
{
public:
void doIt(int x,int y,int z);
};
CChild *pChild = ...
pChild->doIt(123); //FAILS compiler, no method found
CParent *pParent = pChild;
pParent->doIt(123); //works fine
How on earth?
EDIT: people are talking about shadowing/hiding. But the two versions of doIt have different numbers of parameters. Surely that can't confuse the compiler, overloads in child class which can't possibly be confused with the parent class version? Can it?
The compiler error I get is:
error C2660: 'CChild::doIt' : function does not take 1 argument
You have shadowed a method. For example:
struct base
{
void method(int);
void method(float);
};
struct derived : base
{
void method(int);
// base::method(int) is not visible.
// base::method(float) is not visible.
};
You can fix this with a using directive:
class derived : public base
{
using base::method; // bring all of them in.
void method(int);
// base::method(int) is not visible.
// base::method(float) is visible.
};
Since you seem insistent about the number of parameters, I'll address that. That doesn't change anything. Observe:
struct base
{
void method(int){}
};
struct derived : base
{
void method(int,int){}
// method(int) is not visible.
};
struct derived_fixed : base
{
using base::method;
void method(int,int){}
};
int main(void)
{
{
derived d;
d.method(1, 2); // will compile
d.method(3); // will NOT compile
}
{
derived_fixed d;
d.method(1, 2); // will compile
d.method(3); // will compile
}
}
It will still be shadowed regardless of parameters or return types; it's simply the name that shadows. using base::<x>; will bring all of base's "<x>" methods into visibility.
You are hitting a classic problem. You need using CParent::doIt; in your CChild class. I'll scrounge up the duplicate questions.
Edit:
Here's my answer to essentially the same question: Overriding a Base's Overloaded Function in C++
I have never done this without having that method in the base class before. I think that adding "using CLASS::METHOD" in derived class will give you access to the other version of the overloaded method.
class CParent
{
public:
void doIt(int x);
};
class CChild : public CParent
{
public:
void doIt(int x,int y,int z);
using CParent::doIt;
};
The problem is CChild doesn't actually inherit from CParent.
And so it doesn't have a doIt method that takes only one argument.
When you override a function in the derived class, only that function in the derived class is visible to the user of that class. The base class version becomes hidden.
Therefore, your pChild pointer calling doIt(int x) will fail since you are using a derived class pointer to call the base class function. The pParent pointer calling doIt(int x) will work since you are using a base class pointer to call the base class function. Even though you have a child object being pointed to by a parent pointer (upcasted), the class type here is determined by the declaration of the pointer which is a CParent.
To be able to call that base class function using the derived class pointer, you can:
Qualify the base class name in the function call, as in the following:
pChild->CParent::doIt(123);
Use a using directive to bring the function name from the base class into the derived class, as seen in the previous posts.
I understand that this behavior is to give you flexibility to override the behavior of base class method in your derived class.
Lets assume that you have a function foo(int) in base class and you want to change the behavior of this function in your derived class. Now if the base class method is not hidden by your derived class method (which has same prototype as that of base class's method), it will introduce ambiguity in overload resolution.
The method in your child class has a different number of arguments than what you're trying to pass into it. Could it be related to that?