c++ dynamic_cast over decorator instantiations fails - c++

Question

I am trying to understand how decorator pattern works and how much I can "stretch" it to me needs. Following this example, I have extended classes XYZ. There exist derived classes "KLM" (from XYZ)
Specifically, even though I have a decorator pattern, the derived decorator classes "KLM" have some functionality that does not show up in any of their base classes "XYZ", "D", "I" or "A".
So while normally I would instantiate an object as
I * inKLM = new L( new M( new K( new A )));
This would not allow me to access the K::doVirtR() , L::doVirtS() and M::doVirtT() functions (see code below). To access these I would need to downcast the inKLM pointer using dynamic_cast to each of classes "KLM".
The problem is that I only manage to do this for the leftmost new in the expression above. I have read that polymorphism needs to be maintained in order for the dynamic casting to work, so I have tried to have a virtual destructor in all functions. Still I cannot get the dynamic cast to work for anything other than the "outer" new operation (in this case object of class "L").
Please see this code. How can I make not only "LinKLM" , but also "MinKLM" and "KinKLM" success in dynamic_casting ?
#include <iostream>
#include <list>
using namespace std;
class D; //decorator base
struct I { //interface (for both Base and DecoratorBase
I(){
cout << "\n| I::ctor ";
}
virtual ~I(){
cout << "I::dtor |" ;
}
virtual void do_it() = 0;
virtual void regDecorator(D* decorator) = 0;
virtual void train() = 0;
virtual void et() = 0;
};
class D: public I { //DecoratorBase : has same-named fns as Base (must be exported on I) and calls upon them.
public:
D(I * inner) : m_wrappee(inner) {
cout << "D::ctor ";
regDecorator(this);
}
virtual ~D() {
cout << "D::dtor ";
delete m_wrappee;
}
void do_it() {
m_wrappee->do_it();
}
virtual void et() {
cout << "filling in for lack of et() in derived class\n";
} //almost pure virtual, just not implemented in all derived classes
void train(){
m_wrappee->train();
}
private:
void regDecorator(D* decorator){
m_wrappee->regDecorator(decorator);
}
I * m_wrappee;
};
class A: public I { //Base has all the basic functionality
public:
A() {
cout << "A::ctor " ;
decList.clear();
}
~A() {
cout << "A::dtor |" ;
}
void do_it() {
cout << 'A';
}
void train(){
et();
}
void regDecorator(D* decorator)
{
if (decorator) {
cout << "reg=" << decorator << " ";
decList.push_back(decorator);
}
else
cout << "dec is null!" <<endl;
}
private:
void et()
{
//size_t counter=0;
list<D*>::iterator it;
for( it=decList.begin(); it != decList.end(); it++ )
{
//if ( (*it)->et() )
(*it)->et();
//else
// cout << "couldnt et cnt=" << counter << endl;
//counter++;
}
}
std::list<D*> decList;
};
class X: public D { //DerivedDecoratorX ..
public:
X(I *core): D(core){
cout << "X::ctor ";
}
virtual ~X() {
cout << "X::dtor ";
}
void do_it() {
D::do_it();
cout << 'X';
}
void doX() {
cout << "doX" << endl;
}
protected:
virtual void doVirtR() = 0;
private:
void et(){
cout << "X::et" <<endl;
}
};
class K: public X {
public:
K(I * core):X(core) {
cout << "K::ctor " ;
}
virtual ~K() {
cout << "K::dtor ";
}
void doVirtR(){
cout << "doVirtK" <<endl;
}
};
class Y: public D {
public:
Y(I *core): D(core){
cout << "Y::ctor ";
}
virtual ~Y() {
cout << "Y::dtor ";
}
/*void et(){
cout << "Y::et" <<endl;
}*/
void do_it() {
D::do_it();
cout << 'Y';
}
void doY() {
cout << "doY" << endl;
}
protected:
virtual void doVirtS() = 0;
};
class L: public Y{
public:
L(I * core):Y(core) {
cout << "L::ctor ";
}
virtual ~L() {
cout << "L::dtor ";
}
void doVirtS(){
cout << "doVirtL" <<endl;
}
};
class Z: public D {
public:
Z(I *core): D(core){
cout << "Z::ctor ";
}
virtual ~Z() {
cout << "Z::dtor ";
}
void et(){
cout << "Z::et" <<endl;
}
void do_it() {
D::do_it();
cout << 'Z';
}
void doZ() {
cout << "doZ" << endl;
}
virtual void doVirtT() = 0;
};
class M: public Z{
public:
M(I * core):Z(core) { //must add D(core) here explicitly because of virtual inheritance in M's base class (Z).
cout << "M::ctor " ;
}
virtual ~M() {
cout << "M::dtor ";
}
void doVirtT(){
cout << "doVirtM" <<endl;
}
};
int main(void) //testing dynamic casting
{
I * inKLM = new L( new M( new K( new A )));
L * LinKLM = dynamic_cast<L *>( inKLM);
M * MinKLM = dynamic_cast<M *>( inKLM);
K * KinKLM = dynamic_cast<K *>( inKLM);
cout << endl;
if ( ! MinKLM ) cout << "null MinKLM!" << endl;
if ( ! LinKLM ) cout << "null LinKLM!" << endl;
if ( ! KinKLM ) cout << "null KinKLM!" << endl;
//KinKLM->doVirtR();
//LinKLM->doVirtS();
//MinKLM->doVirtT();
//LinKLM->D::train();
//KinKLM->do_it();
//MinKLM->doZ();
delete inKLM;
cout << endl;
return 0;
}

Answer 1

If you need access to functionality that is unique in some of the inner classes, you may be better off (depending on the particular problem) trying mixin classes. The basic idea is to have a template class inherit its template parameter. I have simplified the classes below but the principle is clear:
#include <iostream>
// your base class
class I {
public:
virtual void do_it() {}
};
// a decorator
template <class Base>
class T1 : public Base {
public:
void do_it() {
std::cout << "T1" << std::endl;
Base::do_it();
}
void unique_in_T1() {
std::cout << "Unique in T1" << std::endl;
}
};
// another decorator
template <class Base>
class T2 : public Base {
public:
void do_it() {
std::cout << "T2" << std::endl;
Base::do_it();
}
void unique_in_T2() {
std::cout << "Unique in T2" << std::endl;
}
};
// yet another decorator
template <class Base>
class T3 : public Base {
public:
void do_it() {
std::cout << "T3" << std::endl;
Base::do_it();
}
void unique_in_T3() {
std::cout << "Unique in T3" << std::endl;
}
};
int main(int argc, const char * argv[]) {
T3<T2<T1<I>>> my_object1;
my_object1.do_it();
my_object1.unique_in_T2();
T1<T3<I>> my_object2;
my_object2.do_it();
my_object2.unique_in_T3();
return 0;
}
Your class D is not needed anymore. The main purpose of that class is to wrap the object that actually does the job while maintaining the interface of I. With mixin classes there is no wrapping anymore as it has been replaced by inheritance, hence there is no need for the D class.
Here is a link to read more.