So, what i'm trying to do is this:
I would like to create a general class MyCLASS with a function genericFunction() which is empty by default. Now, when a co-worker wants to use this generic function, what he does is creating an instance of MyClass, and overriding genericFunction(), so it should give a resoult similar to this:
class MyClass{
public:
void genericFunction(){
//boring default actions
}
//constructor
MyClass(){
//do things
}
};
int main(){
MyClass instance();
//now we override the function, something like:
instance.genericFunction(){
cout << "This new code exists only for this instance, and has been created outside the class!";
}
instance.genericFunction();
return 0;
}
So that's basically what I would like to do.
In the case that it is not possible, how can i make my class run a function that is going to be later defined in main()?
Thanks a lot!
EDIT: To answer your questions:
*I'm new to c++ and it's true that my background is from other languages
*The idea is the following: You are creating objects that have a position, and if the position is in a certain range, genericFunction() is executed. The thing is that for each instance the function that is executed may (or in fact should) be different. The idea is 'inspired' by android's clickListener, where each element has a different function to execute when clicked
Thanks again!
If you want to be able to set user defined functions for a class object then you can give it a member variable of type std::function. Using slightly different syntax from your example it could look like this:
class MyClass
{
public:
std::function<void()> genericFunction = []{};
};
int main()
{
MyClass instance;
instance.genericFunction(); // does nothing
// assign a lambda function to our
// function member
instance.genericFunction = []
{
std::cout
<< "This new code exists only for this instance, and has been created outside the class!";
};
instance.genericFunction(); // executes our lambda function
}
EDIT
If you want to be able to pass parameters or receive a return value, then change the template signature to std::function like this:
class MyClass
{
public:
// take a string parameter and return an integer
std::function<int(std::string const&)> genericFunction = [](std::string const&){ return 0; };
};
int main()
{
MyClass instance;
int return_value;
return_value = instance.genericFunction("This will do nothing and return 0"); // does nothing
std::cout << "The first function returned: " << return_value << '\n';
// assign a lambda function to our
// function member
instance.genericFunction = [](std::string const& msg)
{
std::cout << msg << '\n';
return 5;
};
return_value = instance.genericFunction("This will pint a message and return 5"); // executes our lambda function
std::cout << "The second function returned: " << return_value << '\n';
}
Related
I have the following problem. class A implements some routines that should be used on a dataset that is being processed in Class B. That means I'm calling the function start from class A. What I'm doing should be saved in a variable m in class A. So far so good. However, when accessing class variable m it is still on the state when initialized.
To be precise:
#include <iostream>
#include <functional>
class A {
public:
int m;
A() {
m = 100;
}
void start(int value) {
std::cout << "hello there!" << std::endl;
m = value;
}
};
class B {
private:
int m;
public:
void doSomething() {
A a;
doSomething2(std::bind(&A::start,a, std::placeholders::_1));
// access variable m of instance a
std::cout << a.m << std::endl;
}
template <typename Callable>
void doSomething2(Callable f) {
int val = 4444;
f(val);
}
};
main()
{
B b;
b.doSomething();
}
When executing this, I'll get 100 as an output for m. How will I be able to have the changes made by the call of start stored in the class variable? Meaning, storing the value 4444 as in this example? Thanks
Looks like you'll want to make sure that std::bind is using a pointer to the actual class instance you've created. Try changing it to:
// notice I've got '&a' here instead of just 'a'
doSomething2(std::bind(&A::start, &a, std::placeholders::_1));
Without this, I would guess what bind is doing now is making a copy of the a instance and then modifying that one instead of changing it in place.
Bind by default takes arguments by value, in result start() acts on a copy of object a. You have to pass it by reference:
doSomething2(std::bind(&A::start, std::ref(a), std::placeholders::_1));
Possible alternative is to use a lambda expression instead.
I am learning C++ so maybe my question is dumb. I am creating a function that takes a lambda as a parameter. I just want to know if its safe to call it when the lambda function goes out of scope. With code is easier to explain what I mean:
struct SomeStruct
{
// store pointer to callback function
void (*callback)(bool);
int arg1;
int arg2;
};
void some_method(int arg1, int arg2, void (*on_complete_callback)(bool))
{
SomeStruct s;
s.callback = on_complete_callback;
s.arg1 = arg1;
s.arg2 = arg2;
// this helper class will copy the struct even though it is passed by reference
SomeHelperClass->SomeQueue.enqueue( &s );
// do work on a separate task/thread
SomeHelperClass->CreateThread([](){
// get copy of struct
SomeStruct s_copy;
SomeHelperClass->SomeQueue.dequeue( &s_copy );
// do work that takes time to complete
// IS IT SAFE TO CALL THIS CALLBACK FUNCTION?
s_copy.callback(true);
});
}
So my question is given that code if its safe to have something like this?
void method_1()
{
void (*foo)(bool) = [](bool completedCorrectly)
{
cout << "task completed :" << completedCorrectly << endl;
};
some_method(1,2,foo);
// at this point foo should be deleted no?
// why does this work if foo is executed after method_1 completes and its stack is deleted?
// can I have code like that?
}
Edit 2
Here is the same question with working code instead of pseudo code:
#include <iostream> //for using cout
using namespace std; //for using cout
// 3 pointers
int* _X; // points to integer
int* _Y; // points to integer
void (*_F)(int); // points to function
void print_values()
{
cout << "x=" << *_X << " and y=" << *_Y << endl;
}
void some_function()
{
// create variables that live on stack of some_function
int x = 1;
int y = 2;
void (*foo)(int) = [](int someInt)
{
cout << "value passed to lambda is:" << someInt << endl;
};
// point global variables to variables created on this stack x,y and foo
_X = &x;
_Y = &y;
_F = foo;
// works
_F(11);
// works
print_values();
// when exiting variables x,y and foo should be deleted
}
int main(void)
{
// call some function
some_function();
// DOES NOT WORK (makes sense)
print_values();
// WHY DOES THIS WORK? WHY FOO IS NOT DISTROYED LIKE X AND Y?
_F(10);
return 0;
}
If I where to call that method many times and each time with a different lambda will it work? Will the callback method call the correct lambda every time?
A lambda expression is like a class. It is a blueprint for instantiating objects. Classes exist only in source code. A program actually works with objects created from the blueprint defined by a class. Lambda expressions are a source code blueprint for creating closures. Each lambda expression is transformed into a class by the compiler and instantiated into an object called closure. This class has the ability to capture values (that's that the [] part does) and take parameters (that's that the () part does) for its call operator.
Here is an example:
int main()
{
int i = 42;
auto l = [i](int const x){std::cout << x+i << '\n';};
l(2);
}
The compiler transforms this into something similar to the following (generated with https://cppinsights.io/).
int main()
{
int i = 42;
class __lambda_6_11
{
public:
inline /*constexpr */ void operator()(const int x) const
{
std::operator<<(std::cout.operator<<(x + i), '\n');
}
private:
int i;
public:
__lambda_6_11(int & _i)
: i{_i}
{}
};
__lambda_6_11 l = __lambda_6_11{i};
l.operator()(2);
}
You can see here a class that implements the call operator (operator()) with an int argument. You can also see the constructor taking an argument of type int. And then you can see the instantiation of this class at the end of main and the invocation of its call operator.
I hope this helps you understand better how lambdas work.
Within JavaScript, you can pull off something like this:
function bunny() { alert("The bunny jumped."); }
var oldBunny = bunny;
function bunny() {
oldBunny();
alert("The bunny also ran.");
}
bunny(); // The bunny Jumped. The bunny also ran.
As one can see, the old "bunny" function had code appended to it by copying to a variable, then recreating the function with the same name. The copy of the original function runs, and the new code also runs.
I wish to replicate a similar mechanic in C++.
Now before you have a meltdown and start explaining the differences between static and dynamic languages, I get it. I'm not looking for something identical to what's provided, but I do desire something similar.
Furthermore, I'm not trying to do this to modify existing code; I wish to format my own source code to allow such a mechanic for other users to take advantage of.
One of the first ideas I had was to perhaps setup various macros within the code that could later be modified by other files.
Another idea would be to create a Signal and Slots system like in QT. Though I have no clue how to do such a thing myself.
Thank you for reading; I hope you have some suggestions.
Well, if you recognize which feature of JavaScript functions makes this possible, it's not too hard to do the same in C++. In JavaScript functions also have closures, which regular function in C++ don't have. But C++ lambdas are of a closure type. And if one defines bunny to be something which can both hold an object of a closure type, and be reassigned, you're all set.
The C++ standard library offers a nice default choice for this, in the form of std::function. We can just re-write your original JavaScript as follows:
std::function<void()> bunny = [] {
std::cout << "The bunny jumped.\n";
};
auto oldBunny = std::move(bunny);
bunny = [oldBunny] {
oldBunny();
std::cout << "The bunny also ran.\n";
};
bunny();
You can use functors.
#include <iostream>
#include <string>
class Base
{
public:
virtual std::string operator ()()
{
return "Base call";
}
virtual ~Base() {}
};
class Derived : public Base
{
public:
virtual std::string operator()()
{
return "Wrapper: " + Base::operator()();
}
};
int main()
{
Base* pFun = new Base;
std::cout << "Now check Base: " << (*pFun)() << std::endl;
delete pFun;
pFun = new Derived;
std::cout << "Now check Derived: " << (*pFun)() << std::endl;
return 0;
}
Assuming the goal is to allow the calling code to extend the program's functionality beyond what the initial code provided, I might use a user-updatable array of functor-objects, something like this:
#include <iostream>
#include <memory>
class Function
{
public:
virtual void Call() = 0;
};
typedef std::shared_ptr<Function> FunctionSharedPointer;
class OldBunny : public Function
{
public:
virtual void Call()
{
std::cout << "The bunny jumped." << std::endl;
}
};
class NewBunny : public Function
{
public:
NewBunny(FunctionSharedPointer oldFunction) : _oldFunction(oldFunction) {/* empty */}
virtual void Call()
{
_oldFunction->Call();
std::cout << "The bunny also ran." << std::endl;
}
private:
FunctionSharedPointer _oldFunction;
};
enum {
FUNCTION_BUNNY,
// other functions could be declared here later...
NUM_FUNCTIONS
};
// Our table of functions that the user can Call() if he wants to
static FunctionSharedPointer _functionTable[NUM_FUNCTIONS];
// Wrapper function, just to keep users from accessing our table directly,
// in case we ever want to change it to something else
void CallFunction(int whichFunction)
{
_functionTable[whichFunction]->Call();
}
// Another wrapper function
void SetFunction(int whichFunction, FunctionSharedPointer newFunctionDefinition)
{
_functionTable[whichFunction] = newFunctionDefinition;
}
// And another
FunctionSharedPointer GetFunction(int whichFunction)
{
return _functionTable[whichFunction];
}
int main(int argc, char ** argv)
{
// Our default function values get set here
SetFunction(FUNCTION_BUNNY, std::make_shared<OldBunny>());
std::cout << "before:" << std::endl;
CallFunction(FUNCTION_BUNNY);
// Now let's update an entry in our function table to do something different!
FunctionSharedPointer op = GetFunction(FUNCTION_BUNNY);
FunctionSharedPointer np = std::make_shared<NewBunny>(op);
SetFunction(FUNCTION_BUNNY, np);
std::cout << "after:" << std::endl;
CallFunction(FUNCTION_BUNNY);
return 0;
}
void bunny()
{
cout << "The bunny jumped." << endl;
}
void oldBunny()
{
bunny();
}
void newBunny()
{
bunny();
cout << "The bunny also ran." << endl;
}
#define bunny newBunny
int main()
{
bunny();
return 0;
}
If you don't need oldBunny(), just remove it.
can you please explain me why this code shows nothing except for the last std::cout line in main()? Checked through similar threads on stackoverflow.com, was not able to connect them to mine, is this pointing legal at all? I try to set a function pointer of a class to another class function:
#include <iostream>
class container;
class one {
public:
one()
{
eventsHandler = NULL;
};
~one() {};
void (container::*eventsHandler)();
};
class container {
public:
container()
{
zone = new one;
zone->eventsHandler = &container::events;
};
~container()
{
delete zone;
};
one *zone;
void events()
{
std::cout << "event handler is on..." << std::endl;
};
};
int main()
{
container *test = new container;
test->zone->eventsHandler;
std::cout << "just checker..." << std::endl;
delete test;
system("pause");
};
You should use operator->* for calling the member function pointer, and assign test as the object which will be called on,
(test->*test->zone->eventsHandler)();
or more clear,
(test->*(test->zone->eventsHandler))();
LIVE
You need to provide an object to call a pointer to memeber function:
container *test = new container;
(test->*test->zone->eventsHandler)();
Here, test is the object, test->zone->eventsHandler is the pointer to member function that you have saved, and operator->* joins them.
So, it is very much like any other member function; however, you can switch which objects to call a member on:
container *first = new container;
container *second = new container;
(first->*second->zone->eventsHandler)();
// both pointers point to the same function
std::cout << (first->zone->eventsHandler == second->zone->eventsHandler) << std::endl;
You have to actually call the function pointer, in line 38, as:
(test->*test->zone->eventsHandler)();
I want to define a member function in class and use its pointer. I know that I can use static member function but the problem with it is that I can only access the static members of the class. Is there a way other than static member function to be able to get function pointer.
To be more specific: There is a library which I'm using which gets a function pointer as its input. I want to write a member function and assign its function pointer to that external library. Should I create an object of class or use this pointer to do this?
You can get the pointer of the method, but it has to be called with an object
typedef void (T::*MethodPtr) ();
MethodPtr method = &T::MethodA;
T *obj = new T();
obj->*method();
If you need to have non-object pointer and you want to use object then you have to store instance of object somewhere, but you are restricted to use only one object (singleton).
class T {
static T *instance;
public:
T::T() {
instance = this;
}
static void func() {
instance->doStuff();
}
void doStuff() {}
};
If library supports user data for function pointers, then you may have multiple instances
class T {
public:
static void func(void *instance) {
((T*)instance)->doStuff();
}
void doStuff() {}
};
If:
you want to get the function pointer of a nonstatic member from within the class
And use it within the class:
Then:
It can work, because when you get the member function address, there is a "this" pointer. The syntax was not obvious to me, and it may look somewhat ugly, but not TOO bad.
This may not be new to the true experts, but I have wanted to have this in my bag of tricks for a long time.
Here is a complete sample program:
#include <iostream>
class CTestFncPtr
{
public:
CTestFncPtr(int data) : mData(data)
{
// Switch = &CTestFncPtr::SwitchC; // Won't compile - wrong function prototype - this is type safe
if (data == 1)
Switch = &CTestFncPtr::SwitchA;
else
Switch = &CTestFncPtr::SwitchB;
}
void CallSwitch(char *charData)
{
(this->*Switch)(charData);
}
private:
void SwitchA(char * charData)
{
std::cout << "Called Switch A " << "Class Data is " << mData<<" Parameter is " << charData<< "\n";
Switch = &CTestFncPtr::SwitchB;
}
void SwitchB(char * charData)
{
std::cout << "Called Switch B " << "Class Data is " << mData<<" Parameter is " << charData<< "\n";
Switch = &CTestFncPtr::SwitchA;
}
void SwitchC()
{
}
void(CTestFncPtr::*Switch)(char * charData);
int mData;
};
int main(int argc, char * argv[])
{
CTestFncPtr item1(1);
item1.CallSwitch("Item1");
item1.CallSwitch("Switched call Item 1");
CTestFncPtr item2(0);
item2.CallSwitch("Item2");
item2.CallSwitch("Switched call Item 2");
return 0;
}