confused about class structure in code [closed] - c++

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 5 years ago.
Improve this question
I am reading a sample code that uses C++ and classes, I am new on C++ classes I can work with basics similar to this http://www.cplusplus.com/doc/tutorial/classes/, but I cant understand what the code below does mean or the color it is using visual studio c++
thanks
I am sorry if it is a fool question

It creates an object named some by instantiating the class some.
Then it calls the member function ToVector() on the object some and pass the result of the call to the function named function.
class is blue because it is a keyword of the C++ language.
The first some is green because it is the name of a class.
The second some is black because it is a variable.
And function and ToVector are red because the are functions.
Now this is ugly code because you "hide" the class some by reusing the same name for your variable. Also you do not need to put the word class here.
Here is a more complete and nicer version:
#include <vector>
class Some
{
public:
std::vector<int> ToVector()
{
return std::vector<int>(); //return an empty vector
}
};
int f(std::vector<int> v)
{
return 0;
}
int main(int, char**)
{
Some some; // Was "class some some"
return f(some.ToVector());
}

Related

C++ When comparing, pass class as pointer or normally? [closed]

Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed 4 years ago.
Improve this question
I'm quite new to C++, and since I want my code to be good, I have a small question, let's say I have a function
UI::GetColor(CClass Class)
{
if (Class.m_Something)
return 0;
return 1;
}
Is it better to pass the CClass as a pointer, so it's not being copied or not? I saw a lot of code using different styles of that and I'm kind of confused which one is better and why. Thanks for answers.
The function should be written as follows:
class UI {
...
int GetColor(const CClass &c) const {
if (c.m_Something) {
return 0;
}
return 1;
}
}
The reference avoids an unnecessary copy; the const-parameter states that the parameter will not be changed; the const-function declarator states that the function will not change the this-object (i.e. the UI-instance on which it is called).

C++ Calling a function with a vector as a parameter in main [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 6 years ago.
Improve this question
I have a myVector class:
class myVector {
public:
void populateVector();
void showMenu(vector <myVector> const &vec_first);
private:
vector <myVector> &vec_first;
}
I haven't filled my vector yet but I want to essentially use the vector in the showMenu() function, however, a problem arises in my main when I attempt to call the showMenu() function.
int main() {
myVector obj;
obj.showMenu(vector <myVector> const &vec_first);
}
Codeblocks keeps saying:
main.cpp|33|error: expected primary-expression before 'const'
Your are confusing the function declaration with calling it. You need
int main() {
myVector obj;
vector<myVector> vec;
obj.showMenu(vec);
}
or something like that
I haven't filled my vector yet but I want to essentially use the vector in the showMenu() function, however, a problem arises in my main when I attempt to call the showMenu() function.
Don't pass the vector (or anything) in through showMenu; it already has access to the vector, which is a member of the same class.
If you did want to pass a function argument, repeating the argument's original declaration would not be the way to do it. Only its name should be specified. Here that would be:
obj.showMenu(obj.vec_first);
… if vec_first weren't private.
It looks like you need to go back to basics and read the initial chapters of your C++ book.

C++: accessing private members of the class [closed]

Closed. This question needs debugging details. It is not currently accepting answers.
Edit the question to include desired behavior, a specific problem or error, and the shortest code necessary to reproduce the problem. This will help others answer the question.
Closed 7 years ago.
Improve this question
Still getting my head around C++ as I'm new to it, but I'm trying to extend some existing code I've got that is expecting me to make use of the std::vector.
The following is declared in the header (shortened for simplicity):
class WindowManager
{
private:
std::vector<Item*> m_itemlist;
}
My problem is how I'm meant to access this from the .cpp? I'd like to use it to have an array of Item type but I don't understand how to actually get to the point where I can add a newly instantiated Item, let's say button, to the array?
A bit of a rudimentary question but I've not had much luck with tutorials that cover std::vector.
If possible avoid using vector of pointers to Item. Use vector of Item directly.
class WindowManager
{
void addItem(Item const& item) { m_itemlist.push_back(item); }
private:
std::vector<Item> m_itemlist;
};
int main()
{
WindowManager wm;
Item i;
wm.addItem(i);
}
To add an item you could use a member function like this:
class WindowManager
{
private:
std::vector<Item *> m_itemlist;
public:
void addItem(Item *newItem);
}
in window_manager.cpp:
void WindowManager::addItem(Item *newItem)
{
m_itemlist.push_back(newItem);
}
see std::vector::push_back()

How to choose among two classes given a condition in c++? [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
Suppose there are two classes Class1 and Class2. given a condition I have to choose among them in shortest way possible without using if-else.
Means least lines of code.
At compile time only!!!
class class1{};
class class2{};
auto data = (((condition) ? class1 : class2) *)(variable)
Assuming you need to create object at compile time depending on a variable, you can try something like following
class class1{};
class class2{};
int main( int argc, char *argv[] )
{
constexpr bool variable =true;
/* x is object of type class1 or class2 depending on
compile time constant 'variable'
*/
typedef std::conditional<variable, class1, class2>::type x;
//std::cout << typeid(x).name() << '\n';
return 0;
}
See Here

C++ Reference Variable [closed]

Closed. This question needs details or clarity. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Add details and clarify the problem by editing this post.
Closed 8 years ago.
Improve this question
How to use 'reference variables' in C++ classes?
I have the following code that I want to put into a class: (note KinectCV&)
KinectCV& kinect = freenect.createDevice(0);
kinect.some_init_functions();
while(condition) {
// getting frames from kinect and processing
kinect.some_processing_functions();
}
kinect.some_stopping_functions();
I'm trying to make a class and separate init, process and stop functions:
class MyKinect {
public:
KinectCV kinect;
void init(){
/* I cannot use the '& kinect = freenect.createDevice(0);' syntax, help me in this */
}
void process(){
kinect.some_processing_functions();
}
void stop(){
kinect.some_stopping_functions();
}
}
I cannot use the '& kinect = freenect.createDevice(0)
That is right, you cannot assign references; once initialized, they refer to the same object forever. What looks like an assignment in your code that works
KinectCV& kinect = freenect.createDevice(0);
is not an assignment, it's initialization. It can be rewritten using the initialization syntax instead of the assignment syntax, like this:
KinectCV& kinect(freenect.createDevice(0));
The reason behind it is that in C++ all initialization must happen in the constructor, not in a "designated initialization function". C++ has no idea that init is your initialization function; all it knows is that once the constructor is over, the object must be in a consistent state, included with all the references that it might hold.
Moving the initialization code into MyKinect's constructor will fix the problem:
class MyKinect {
public:
KinectCV kinect;
MyKinect() : kinect(freenect.createDevice(0)) {
}
}